The subtle effects of implicit bias instructions

Abstract

Judges are increasingly using "implicit bias" instructions in jury trials in an effort to reduce the influence of jurors' biases on judgment. In this article, we report on findings from a large-scale mock jury study that tests the impact of implicit bias instructions on judgment in a case where defendant race was varied (Black or White). Using an experimental design, we collected and analyzed quantitative and qualitative data at the individual and group levels obtained from 120 small groups who viewed a simulated federal drug conspiracy trial and then deliberated to determine a verdict. We find that while participants were sensitized to the importance of being unbiased, implicit bias instructions had no measurable impact on verdict outcomes relative to the standard instructions. Our analysis of the deliberations, however, reveals that those who heard the implicit bias instructions were more likely to discuss the issue of bias, potentially with both ameliorative and harmful effects on the defendant. Most significantly, we identified multiple instances where, in an effort to avoid bias, participants who heard the implicit bias instructions interfered with their own or other participants' appropriate assessments of witness credibility. | INTRODUCTIONWe have experienced a dramatic shift in recent years in how racial and other biases are conceptualized and understood by scholars and the general public alike. Most notably, implicit biases-"attitudes or stereotypes that affect our understanding, decision making, and behavior, without our even realizing it" (Kang et al., 2012(Kang et al., , p. 1126-are now widely understood to be a driving force behind social inequality and discrimination. A diverse array of organizations and institutions have become attuned to the problem of implicit bias and its impact on members of underrepresented racial and ethnic groups, including in education (

Factors influencing the assessment of witnesses in juridical contexts: a literature review. Legal, civil and psychological implications

“…Understanding and managing these implicit biases could certainly help juries to be impartial. This need noted in our research is also confirmed in studies by Lynch et al (2022) and Zenker et al (2016) regarding the importance of facilitating judges in monitoring their own cognitive processes. For example, there are many studies on "debiasing techniques" in the literature.…”

“…This research examines the connection between the self-confidence expressed by the witness and the assessment of the witness' credibility Gojkovich et al (2019) Empirical study; quantitative study This study examines the effects of dress and speech style of a cowitness had on the credibility of that witness and the amount of misinformation that was accepted from the witness Kaminski and Sporer (2018) Empirical study; quantitative study This study investigated persuasive effects of behaviour cues on observer judgements of eyewitness identification decisions Klettke et al (2016) Empirical study; quantitative study This study was examined whether perceptions of credibility of female victims of sexual abuse varied across generation Y, generation X, "baby boomers" and "builders" Kwong See et al (2001) Empirical study; quantitative study This study was assessed indirectly the effect of age stereotyping on believability using a variant of Loftus' misinformation paradigm Lynch et al (2022) Empirical study; quantitative study In this article, the authors report on findings from a large-scale mock jury study that tests the impact of implicit bias instructions on judgement in a case where defendant race was varied (Black or White) Empirical study; quantitative study In this study, the authors explore the use of verbal and non-verbal modalities to build a multimodal deception detection system that aims to discriminate between truthful and deceptive statements provided by defendants and witnesses Slovenko (1999) Qualitative study and its presence and frequency can influence the credibility evaluation. In particular, it has been noted that the appropriate and pertinent use of smiling can generate a greater perception of pleasantness, safety and credibility, with a significant impact on the efficacy of the provided deposition; specifically, women who smiled were deemed more pleasant than women who did not (Nagle, 2015).…”

Schematic expectations influence mock jurors' sexual violence case fact recognition

“…Unfortunately, most of the theoretical processes at play discussed thus far are unconscious or implicit in nature. Several attempts at providing jurors with instructions regarding implicit bias have been undertaken with little effect at best, or at worst, with unintended negative repercussions (Lynch et al, 2022). Ultimately, the results of our study do not preclude us from hope that jury education could help combat some of the memory issues and biases highlighted in the literature, but it does lend us to believe the best option still remains to require jurors to review all case evidence during deliberation (see Pritchard & Keenan, 1999).…”

Battling bias: can two implicit bias remedies reduce juror racial bias?

“…More broadly, only two published studies attempted to evaluate implicit bias jury instructions (Elek & Agor, 2014;Lynch et al, 2022). However, neither were able to test the instructions' effectiveness because mock jurors did not display any racial bias.…”