Juror decision making in not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder trials: Effects of defendant gender and mental illness type

Mock Juror Perceptions of Credibility and Culpability in an Autistic Defendant

“…Jurors often make attributions based on the perceived controllability of behaviour (Weiner 1985, 2006) and conditions that are rooted in biological bases are often considered uncontrollable and therefore mitigating factors (e.g., Aspinwall et al 2012). This has been shown to result in perceptions of diminished blameworthiness and culpability in other groups such as those with intellectual disabilities and schizophrenia (Alicke 1990; Barnett et al 2007; Bottoms et al 2003; Mossière and Maeder 2016; Najdowski et al 2009).…”

Mad and/or bad? Jurors' attitudes towards women and men who plead insanity

“…For example, Breheney and colleagues (2007) found that women jurors were more likely to accept that (attribute less responsibility) the defendant's mental illness impacted their actions than were men jurors. The present study's lack of a significant effect of defendant and juror gender on jurors' verdicts may fit in with the while some researchers found that women defendants are significantly more likely than men to be found guilty when pleading insanity for the same charge (Breheney et al, 2007) other researchers found no such effect (Mossière & Maeder, 2016). Accordingly, the present study's findings of a null effect of defendant gender on verdict may be consistent with insanity jury decision-making literature in the Canadian context.…”

“…Within the Canadian context, Mossière and Maeder (2016) found no main effect of defendant gender on mock jurors' verdict in an NCRMD trial. They did, however, find a significant effect of defendant gender on the attributions that mock jurors made about the defendant who was charged with second-degree murder.…”

“…They did, however, find a significant effect of defendant gender on the attributions that mock jurors made about the defendant who was charged with second-degree murder. Specifically, mock jurors made more internal attributions for the woman defendant compared to the man defendant, indicating that participants were more likely to attribute the criminal act to the woman defendant's personality (Mossière & Maeder, 2016).…”

“…Although numerous studies have measured how defendant gender influences jurors' verdicts (e.g., Bornstein & Muller, 2001;Nagal & Hagan, 1983;Quas et al, 2002;Russell, Ragatz, & Kraus, 2012;Spohn & Spears, 1997), those that measure jurors' specific stereotypes and emotions about defendant gender in insanity trials are far less common (Breheney et al 2007; Mossière & Maeder, 2016). In fact, while research has demonstrated that gender stereotypes significantly impact jurors' perceptions of a woman defendant's guilt (Maeder & Dempsey, 2013), the literature has not yet examined which specific stereotypes (e.g., warmth and competence stereotypes; Fiske, Cuddy, Glick, & Xu, 2002) jurors consult when determining the criminal responsibility of men and women defendants.…”