The believability of hearsay testimony in a child sexual assault trial.

Golding, Jonathan M.; Sanchez, Rebecca Polley; Sego, Sandra A.

doi:10.1023/a:1024842816130

Cited by 39 publications

(84 citation statements)

References 22 publications

(44 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In brief, research that has examined adult rape cases with a female victim and a male perpetrator indicates that men tend to blame victims more, identify and empathize with victims less, and attribute greater responsibility to victims (Deitz, Blackwell, Daley, & Bentley, 1982;Foley & Pigott, 2000;see Brekke & Borgida, 1988, for a review). A similar pattern of results is noted in the literature for child victims of sexual violence, in that female jurors, compared to male jurors, tend to make more pro-victim case decisions with respect to credibility, responsibility, or guilt judgments (Bottoms, 1993;Bottoms, Davis, & Epstein, 2004;Bottoms & Goodman, 1994;Crowley, O'Gallaghan, & Ball, 1994;Golding, Sanchez, & Sego, 1997Golding, Sego, Sanchez, & Hasemann, 1995;McCauley & Parker, 2001;Quas, Goodman, & Jones, 2003;Schmidt & Brigham, 1996; for a meta-analytic review, see Schutte & Hosch, 1997). Whether such a gender effect also would be observed in an SVP mock jury paradigm with a child victim has never been tested.…”

supporting

confidence: 63%

Gender differences in attitudes toward psychopathic sexual offenders

Guy

Edens

2006

Behavioral Sci & The Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although a considerable amount of research has been conducted examining the validity of psychopathy as a psychological construct, relatively few studies have focused on the effects of using this disorder in "real-world" settings to influence the attitudes of laypersons who are making life-altering decisions about offenders. This study attempted to replicate and extend earlier findings (Guy & Edens, 2003) suggesting that there are gender differences in the impact of expert testimony regarding psychopathy. A sample of 599 undergraduates reviewed case facts regarding a hypothetical Sexually Violent Predator trial in which the type of risk assessment testimony provided (clinical opinion, actuarial scale, psychopathy evaluation) and the age of the victims (adult versus child) were manipulated. Consistent with prior research, despite overall high rates of support for commitment in the adult victim condition, men were less prone than women to support civil commitment when the defendant was described as "a psychopath" (62.5 versus 86.5%). No such gender differences were noted in the clinical opinion or actuarial conditions. When the victims were identified as children, type of testimony had no impact because support for commitment was almost unilateral. Finally, ratings of how psychopathic the defendant was perceived to be (regardless of the testimony provided) were significantly associated with support for commitment across most conditions.

show abstract

supporting

confidence: 63%

Gender differences in attitudes toward psychopathic sexual offenders

Guy

Edens

2006

Behavioral Sci & The Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Researchers have reported that, compared with men, women tend to find the victim more credible, render more guilty verdicts, and have less favorable impressions of the defendant (see, e.g., Bottoms, 1993;Bottoms & Goodman, 1994;Crowley et al, 1994;Golding, Sanchez, & Sego, 1997;Gabora et al, 1993;McCauley & Parker, 2001;Schmidt & Brigham, 1996;Swim, Borgida, & McCoy, 1993). Meta-analytic findings (Schutte & Hosch, 1997) of gender differences also indicated a slight tendency for women to convict more often than men.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Juror decision‐making in a mock sexually violent predator trial: gender differences in the impact of divergent types of expert testimony

Guy

Edens

2003

Behavioral Sci & The Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite widespread use of mental health testimony in cases where violence risk is at issue, relatively little is known about the impact of such information on juror decision-making. This study addressed the effects of testimony based on three types of risk assessment instrument or method (clinical opinion, actuarial assessment, and ratings of psychopathy) to examine whether they would have differential impact on jurors' perceptions of the defendant. In a mock sexually violent predator civil commitment trial, 172 undergraduates were presented a case summary that included prosecution and defense expert testimony related to violence risk based on one of the three methods noted above. Consistent with earlier research, the hypothesis that a defendant described as a "high risk psychopath" by the prosecution would be judged more severely than a defendant judged as "high risk" based on other evaluation procedures was supported, but only among female jurors. Unlike prior studies, little support was found for the hypothesis that clinical opinion testimony would be more influential than actuarially based testimony for either gender. Mechanisms that may underlie the observed gender differences are discussed, as are the potential implications of these findings for civil commitment proceedings.

show abstract

“…below 12 years of age) are viewed more favourably by mock jurors than older children or adults, (i.e. recovered memory and rape victims; Bottoms & Goodman, 1994;Clark & Nightingale, 1997;Crowley et al, 1994;Golding, Sanchez, & Sego, 1997;McCauley & Parker, 2001;Nightingale, 1993, Wright, Hanoteau, Parkinson, & Tatham, 2009. For example, Nightingale (1993, Experiment 2) had mock jurors read about a CSA case involving a girl and systematically varied the age of the victim from 6-to 14-years of age.…”

Section: Victim Agementioning

confidence: 99%

When children are witnesses: The effects of context, age and gender on adults' perceptions of cognitive ability and honesty

Nuñez

Kehn

Wright

2010

Appl. Cognit. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The goals of the present study were to examine how context impacts perceptions of children, and the extent to which context interacts with a child's age and gender to alter adults perceptions of children. Specifically, we examine how perceptions of honesty (i.e. knowing the difference between truth and lie, being trusted by adults, being reliable, and honest) and cognitive ability (i.e. having a good memory for events and being able to attend and concentrate) are the same or different in the context of a child sexual abuse case (CSA) than when no context is provided. First, the results revealed few significant findings with regard to either juror or child gender. The analyses did reveal several context effects, with attention, trusted, reliable and honesty each producing higher ratings, and therefore better perceived memories, in the CSA condition than the no context condition. Also, ratings of all the dependent variables varied by age and 4 out of the 5 higher order interactions involved child age. Importantly, we found that ratings of honesty and cognitive abilities were not linear with age but, typically, ratings increased with age but then leveled out or started decreasing after 8 years-of-age.

show abstract

The believability of hearsay testimony in a child sexual assault trial.

Cited by 39 publications

References 22 publications

Gender differences in attitudes toward psychopathic sexual offenders

Gender differences in attitudes toward psychopathic sexual offenders

Juror decision‐making in a mock sexually violent predator trial: gender differences in the impact of divergent types of expert testimony

When children are witnesses: The effects of context, age and gender on adults' perceptions of cognitive ability and honesty

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About