When a Battered Victim Kills Their Abuser: The Impact of Child and Expert Testimony on Mock Jurors’ Decision-Making

IF 2.6 3区 心理学 Q1 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY Journal of Interpersonal Violence Pub Date : 2024-10-08 DOI:10.1177/08862605241284662
Hana Chae, Kelly McWilliams
{"title":"When a Battered Victim Kills Their Abuser: The Impact of Child and Expert Testimony on Mock Jurors’ Decision-Making","authors":"Hana Chae, Kelly McWilliams","doi":"10.1177/08862605241284662","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The present study investigated the effects of child and expert witness testimony on mock jurors’ decision-making and perceptions of a case in which a female defendant claimed self-defense as the reason for killing her husband during a domestic dispute. A 3 (expert witness: Battered Woman Syndrome [BWS] vs. Social Agency [SA] vs. No Expert) × 3 (child witness: Age 5 vs. Age 8 vs. no child) between-subject design was used to examine the effects of two different forms of expert testimony and their interaction with the presence of a child witness. Jury-eligible participants ( N = 370) were recruited from Amazon Mechanical Turk and a Psychology Undergraduate Student Pool. The mock jurors who were exposed to the BWS expert perceived the defendant as more guilty when an 8-year-old testified compared to when no child testified at all. Furthermore, when the jurors were exposed to the BWS expert, they imposed a harsher sentence on the defendant when an 8-year-old child testified compared to a 5-year-old child or no child testifying. Although the jurors perceived the defendant in the BWS condition as more fearful compared to no expert and the SA condition, this knowledge did not seem to translate into a lighter verdict or sentencing decision. This study aims to provide guidelines for future researchers and legal professionals considering the issue of expert testimony and child witnesses in intimate partner homicides.","PeriodicalId":16289,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Interpersonal Violence","volume":"8 1","pages":"8862605241284662"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Interpersonal Violence","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/08862605241284662","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The present study investigated the effects of child and expert witness testimony on mock jurors’ decision-making and perceptions of a case in which a female defendant claimed self-defense as the reason for killing her husband during a domestic dispute. A 3 (expert witness: Battered Woman Syndrome [BWS] vs. Social Agency [SA] vs. No Expert) × 3 (child witness: Age 5 vs. Age 8 vs. no child) between-subject design was used to examine the effects of two different forms of expert testimony and their interaction with the presence of a child witness. Jury-eligible participants ( N = 370) were recruited from Amazon Mechanical Turk and a Psychology Undergraduate Student Pool. The mock jurors who were exposed to the BWS expert perceived the defendant as more guilty when an 8-year-old testified compared to when no child testified at all. Furthermore, when the jurors were exposed to the BWS expert, they imposed a harsher sentence on the defendant when an 8-year-old child testified compared to a 5-year-old child or no child testifying. Although the jurors perceived the defendant in the BWS condition as more fearful compared to no expert and the SA condition, this knowledge did not seem to translate into a lighter verdict or sentencing decision. This study aims to provide guidelines for future researchers and legal professionals considering the issue of expert testimony and child witnesses in intimate partner homicides.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
当被殴打的受害者杀死施虐者时:儿童和专家证词对模拟陪审员决策的影响
本研究调查了儿童证人和专家证人的证词对模拟陪审员的决策和看法的影响,在这起案件中,一名女性被告声称在家庭纠纷中杀死丈夫的原因是自卫。一名 3 岁儿童(专家证人:被殴打妇女综合症[BWS] vs. 社会机构[SA] vs. 无专家)× 3(儿童证人:5 岁 vs. 8 岁 vs. 无儿童)的被试间设计来研究两种不同形式的专家证词及其与儿童证人在场的交互作用的影响。符合陪审员资格的参与者(N = 370)是从亚马逊 Mechanical Turk 和心理学本科生库中招募的。与没有儿童作证的情况相比,当 8 岁儿童出庭作证时,接触到 BWS 专家的模拟陪审员认为被告更有罪。此外,当陪审员接触到 BWS 专家时,与 5 岁儿童或没有儿童作证相比,当 8 岁儿童作证时,他们对被告的量刑更重。虽然与无专家和有专家条件相比,陪审员认为有专家条件下的被告更加恐惧,但这种认知似乎并没有转化为更轻的判决或量刑决定。本研究旨在为今后研究人员和法律专业人士在考虑亲密伴侣杀人案中的专家证词和儿童证人问题时提供指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
12.00%
发文量
375
期刊介绍: The Journal of Interpersonal Violence is devoted to the study and treatment of victims and perpetrators of interpersonal violence. It provides a forum of discussion of the concerns and activities of professionals and researchers working in domestic violence, child sexual abuse, rape and sexual assault, physical child abuse, and violent crime. With its dual focus on victims and victimizers, the journal will publish material that addresses the causes, effects, treatment, and prevention of all types of violence. JIV only publishes reports on individual studies in which the scientific method is applied to the study of some aspect of interpersonal violence. Research may use qualitative or quantitative methods. JIV does not publish reviews of research, individual case studies, or the conceptual analysis of some aspect of interpersonal violence. Outcome data for program or intervention evaluations must include a comparison or control group.
期刊最新文献
Role of Maternal Adverse Childhood Experiences on Infant Neglect: A Multi-Perspective Approach. Emerging Trends in Intimate Partner Rape and Marital/Spousal Rape During the Biennium 2020 and 2021, Including the COVID-19 Pandemic in Greece. The Spatial Scale and Spread of Child Victimization. A Comprehensive Model of Community Violence Exposure Outcomes Using an Ecological Systems Framework. Constructing Hate Crimes: Does Respondent's Racial/Ethnic Identity Matter?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1