Racial Bias in Mock Juror Decision-Making: A Meta-Analytic Review of Defendant Treatment.

Mitchell, Tara L.; Haw, Ryann M; Pfeifer, Jeffrey E.; Meissner, Christian A.

doi:10.1007/s10979-005-8122-9

Cited by 264 publications

(249 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

216

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Other research shows that Blacks are disadvantaged compared to Whites in a variety of aspects of social life (e.g., Stanley, Sokol-Hessner, Banaji, & Phelps, 2011;Mitchell, Haw, Pfeifer, & Meissner, 2005). Given this, many participants may have believed that favoring Black over White applicants is the same as treating White and Black applicants equally.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

An Unintentional, Robust, and Replicable Pro-Black Bias in Social Judgment

Axt¹,

Ebersole²,

Nosek³

2016

Social Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PRO-BLACK BIAS IN SOCIAL JUDGMENT 2 AbstractEmpirical evidence and social commentary demonstrate favoring of Whites over Blacks in attitudes, social judgment, and social behavior. In 6 studies (N > 4,000), we provide evidence for a pro-Black bias in academic decision-making. When making multiple admissions decisions for an academic honor society, participants from undergraduate and online samples had a more relaxed acceptance criterion for Black than White candidates, even though participants possessed implicit and explicit preferences for Whites over Blacks. This pro-Black criterion bias persisted among subsamples that wanted to be unbiased and believed they were unbiased. It also persisted even when participants were given warning of the bias or incentives to perform accurately.These results suggest opportunity for theoretical and empirical innovation on the conditions under which biases in social judgment favor and disfavor different social groups, and how those biases manifest outside of awareness or control. If there is one conclusion to draw from decades of research on stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination in the United States, it is that Whites are treated more favorably than Blacks (Greenwald & Pettigrew, 2014;List, 2004;Pager & Shepherd, 2008). Historically, this is understood in the context of slavery, lynchings, segregation, and state-sponsored discrimination.But, evidence from late 20th and early 21st century research suggests that the effects persist, if in subtler, even unintentional forms (Greenwald & Banaji, 1995;Nosek, Smyth et al., 2007). Whites exhibited associations, attitudes, or behaviors that favored Whites over Blacks, and two papers in which Whites had attitudes, associations or behaviors that favored Blacks over Whites.In the first instance of pro-Black behavior (Unzueta, Everly & Gutierrez, 2014), White participants reported greater liking for a Black than White person after each complained about experiencing discrimination. In the other instance (Galinsky, Hall, & Cuddy, 2013), a majorityWhite sample was more likely to choose a Black female than White female candidate for a leadership position within a company, though White males were preferred over Black males.That such a majority of the research finds preferences for Whites over Blacks is perhaps not surprising given that, on average, Whites show explicit and implicit preferences for Whites PRO-BLACK BIAS IN SOCIAL JUDGMENT

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

An Unintentional, Robust, and Replicable Pro-Black Bias in Social Judgment

Axt¹,

Ebersole²,

Nosek³

2016

Social Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In contrast, the literature on racial disparities in sentencing across nonhomicide cases is mixed (Mitchell, Haw, Pfeifer, & Meissner, 2005). Kramer and Steffensmeir (1993) found race to be a small factor in sentencing across cases in their review of the Pennsylvania courts.…”

Section: Terror Management and Justice Disparities By Racementioning

confidence: 99%

Empathy, Social Dominance Orientation, Mortality Salience, and Perceptions of a Criminal Defendant

Crawley

Suarez

2016

Sage Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In two studies, participants completed measures of trait empathy and social dominance orientation, read a summary of a hit and run trial, and provided reactions to the case. In Study 1, the three randomly assigned conditions included a prompt to empathize with the victims, the empathy prompt with a mortality salience manipulation, and a control condition. Participants high in trait empathy were harsher in their judgments of the defendant than were low empathy participants, particularly after having read the mortality salience prompt. The results indicated that mortality salience had triggered personality differences. Participants high in social dominance assigned harsher sentences across conditions. Study 2 involved the same paradigm, but the prompts were presented on behalf of the defendant. Despite the pro-defendant slant, the pattern of results was similar to Study 1. Differences by trait empathy were more apparent among participants experiencing mortality salience, and social dominance was related to sentence choices. There were no indications in either study of mortality salience increasing bias against defendants in general or increasing racial bias.

show abstract

“…Chen and Li (2009) show that individuals are not only more altruistic, but also they have less envy towards members of their own groups and when matched with in-group members, are more likely to choose social welfare maximization outcomes. Mitchell et al (2005) shows that mock jurors tend to decide in favor of individuals who share their ethnicity and were more likely to give longer sentences for other race defendants. Additionally, there is evidence that individuals evaluate the kindness of a person, taking into consideration how that person has treated other individuals, specially those who are close to them.…”

Section: Evidencementioning

confidence: 99%

A theory of sequential group reciprocity

Moreno-Okuno

Mosiño

2017

Lat Am Econ Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Games that appear to be independent, involving none of the same players, may be related by emotions of reciprocity between the members of the same groups. In the real world, individuals are members of groups and want to reward or punish those groups whose members have been kind or unkind to members of their own. In this paper, we extend Dufwenberg and Kirchsteiger's model of sequential reciprocity (Games Econ Behav 47(2): 2004) to groups of individuals and define a new ''sequential group reciprocity equilibrium'' for which we prove its existence. We study the case of two games with two players in each game, where each player belongs to the same group as a player in the other game. We show that when the payoffs of one game are much higher than the payoffs of the other, the outcome of the game with higher payoffs determines the outcome of the other game. We also find that when the payoffs are very asymmetric, the outcome where the sum of the payoffs is maximized is a sequential group reciprocity equilibrium.

show abstract

Racial Bias in Mock Juror Decision-Making: A Meta-Analytic Review of Defendant Treatment.

Cited by 264 publications

References 43 publications

An Unintentional, Robust, and Replicable Pro-Black Bias in Social Judgment

An Unintentional, Robust, and Replicable Pro-Black Bias in Social Judgment

Empathy, Social Dominance Orientation, Mortality Salience, and Perceptions of a Criminal Defendant

A theory of sequential group reciprocity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About