Law and Human Behavior最新文献

Objective: Using archival and experimental methods, we tested the role that racial associations of first names play in criminal sentencing.

Hypotheses: We hypothesized that Black defendants with more stereotypically Black names (e.g., Jamal) would receive more punitive sentences than Black defendants with more stereotypically White names (e.g., James).

Method: In an archival study, we obtained a random sample of 296 real-world records of Black male prison inmates in Florida and asked participants to rate the extent to which each inmate's first name was stereotypically Black or stereotypically White. We then tested the extent to which racial stereotypicality was associated with sentence length, controlling for relevant legal features of each case (e.g., criminal record, severity of convicted offenses). In a follow-up experiment, participant judges assigned sentences in cases in which the Black male defendant was randomly assigned a more stereotypically Black or White name from our archival study.

Results: Controlling for a wide array of factors-including criminal record-we found that inmates with more stereotypically Black versus White first names received longer sentences β = 0.09, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) [0.01, 0.16]: 409 days longer for names 1 standard deviation above versus below the mean on racial stereotypicality. In our experiment, participant judges recommended significantly longer sentences to Black inmates with more stereotypically Black names above and beyond the severity of the charges or their criminal history, β = 0.07, 95% CI [0.02, 0.13].

Conclusions: Our results identify how racial associations with first names can bias consequential sentencing decisions despite the impartial aims of the legal system. More broadly, our findings illustrate how racial biases manifest in distinctions made among members of historically marginalized groups, not just between members of different groups. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Objective: The overrepresentation of numerous racial/ethnic groups in the criminal legal system warrants examination of the cross-cultural applicability of risk assessment tools. Static-99R is a tool used in diverse countries to assess sexual recidivism risk. We conducted a meta-analysis on the predictive accuracy of Static-99R across different racial/ethnic groups.

Hypotheses: No hypotheses were made regarding discrimination, given that past research could support hypotheses of differential or equivalent accuracy. We hypothesized that Indigenous individuals would score higher on Static-99R than non-Indigenous or White individuals.

Method: Our search identified 18 eligible documents (from 17 distinct studies) with 41 nonoverlapping effect sizes. These 17 studies examined the predictive accuracy of Static-99R with racially/ethnically diverse men charged with or convicted of sexually motivated offenses. We report analyses using both fixed-effect and random-effects meta-analysis.

Results: Indigenous and Black individuals scored significantly higher on Static-99R than their non-Indigenous or White counterparts, with small effect sizes. For discrimination, area under the curve (AUC) values were generally moderate-to-large and statistically significant for all groups in both fixed-effect and random-effects analyses. Within-study subgroup analyses indicated significantly lower accuracy for Indigenous and Hispanic individuals compared with White/non-Indigenous samples (though for Hispanic individuals, this finding was significant only in the fixed-effect analyses). No statistically significant differences in accuracy were found between White and Black individuals. Static-99R significantly predicted recidivism with large effect sizes across two samples of Asian individuals. Two studies supported calibration across Black, White, and Hispanic individuals. Two studies examining calibration of Static-99R for Indigenous individuals had mixed findings.

Conclusions: Given a small number of studies and limitations with both the fixed- and random-effects analyses, readers should interpret findings regarding Hispanic individuals with caution. The analyses clearly found significant but lower accuracy for Static-99R with Indigenous individuals. Potential reasons for this differential accuracy are discussed, along with limitations of the meta-analysis and suggestions for research and practice. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Objective: Many highly publicized police use-of-force encounters have recently occurred in the United States. This project primarily explored whether officer, juror, or victim race affects verdicts in trials involving police use of force.

Hypotheses: Because of recent conflicting research surrounding race and juror decision-making, we conducted an exploratory analysis on the interactive effects of juror, victim, and defendant race. We hypothesized that mock jurors with favorable perceptions of police legitimacy would be less likely to convict an officer charged with manslaughter.

Method: Four hundred sixteen (243 women, 170 men, three another gender; 263 White, 50 Asian, 44 Black, 41 Latine, four Native American, 14 another race/ethnicity) jury-eligible community members read a trial transcript involving a police officer charged with manslaughter, in which we manipulated victim and defendant race (Black, White), then rendered a verdict and answered a questionnaire.

Results: We found significant effects of police legitimacy and defendant race on verdicts. The main effect was qualified by an interaction between juror race/ethnicity and defendant race. Simple-slope analyses revealed no effect of defendant race for White mock jurors. In comparison, Black, indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC) mock jurors were significantly more likely to convict a White than a Black defendant. We also observed significant effects of police legitimacy, defendant race, and victim race on perceptions of the officer's use of force.

Conclusions: Our analyses revealed that mock jurors were significantly more punitive when the defendant was White compared with Black, and they perceived the officer's use of force as significantly more excessive when the officer was White or the victim was Black. These effects appear to be driven primarily by BIPOC jurors. Mock jurors with more favorable perceptions of police legitimacy were significantly less likely to convict the officer and viewed his use of force as less excessive. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Objective: Black people are disproportionately targeted and disadvantaged in the criminal legal system. We tested whether Black exonerees are similarly disadvantaged by the stigma of wrongful conviction.

Hypotheses: In Experiment 1, we predicted that the stigma of wrongful conviction would be greater for Black than White exonerees. After finding the opposite pattern, we conducted two experiments to investigate the psychological underpinnings of this counterintuitive effect-specifically, whether it was driven by attempts to appear unprejudiced and/or beliefs regarding the legal system bias that Black and White exonerees face.

Method: In Experiment 1, we unobtrusively measured non-Black participants' behavioral reactions to an anticipated meeting with a Black or White exoneree or businessman. In Experiment 2, participants completed measures that assessed their motivation to appear unprejudiced and then, in a separate session, evaluated a Black or White exoneree and reported their beliefs about the legal system bias faced by the exoneree. Experiment 3 was a partial replication of Experiment 2. In Experiments 2 and 3, we examined data from both non-Black and Black participants.

Results: Non-Black participants in Experiment 1 stigmatized the White exoneree, d = -0.31, 95% confidence interval (CI) [-0.72, 0.10], but not the Black exoneree, d = 0.44, 95% CI [0.04, 0.83]. Experiments 2 and 3 replicated this finding, showing that the effect was mediated by the belief that Black exonerees faced greater legal system bias than White exonerees (Experiment 2: B = 0.21, SE = 0.06, 95% CI [0.11, 0.33]; Experiment 3: B = 0.35, SE = 0.09, 95% CI [0.19, 0.55]). Our results also suggested that Black individuals react more favorably to Black than White exonerees, potentially because of their beliefs regarding legal system bias.

Conclusions: People may react more favorably to Black than White exonerees because of the belief that Black exonerees face greater injustices within the legal system. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Objective: State of Washington v. Sisouvanh (2012) was the first case in which an appellate court asserted the need for cultural competence in competency-to-stand-trial evaluations. A court reiterated this need in State of Washington v. Ortiz-Abrego (2017). Research in forensic psychology seldom addressed cultural considerations in pretrial evaluations until this past decade, but the growing body of literature pales in comparison to the work found in clinical and counseling psychology. Most of the current literature acknowledges the lack of professionally sanctioned practice guidelines and makes valuable suggestions regarding how to address cultural factors that are relevant to the requisite capacities of legal competency. Yet, none of this research addresses potential risks incurred by the evaluators who attempt to incorporate these suggestions into practice or acknowledges the possible incompatibility between forensic and cultural competency principles.

Hypotheses: The authors posit there may be areas of incompatability, or tension, between the tenets of forensic psychology and cultural competency.

Method: To examine this potential incompatibility, we reviewed legal cases with cultural implications, addressed recent developments regarding cultural "incompetence," and conducted an overview of cultural competency in clinical and forensic psychology.

Results: Comparing general principles of forensic psychology with those of cultural responsiveness and humility, we found that questions emerged regarding the potential philosophical conflicts as well as risks that may be incurred by individual evaluators in legal settings.

Conclusions: The resultant dilemma sets the stage for pragmatic suggestions regarding communication, assessment, and diagnosis. Finally, we emphasize the need for sanctioned practice guidelines. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Objectives: Prosecutors often use race as a basis for excluding Black jurors in cases with Black defendants. The current research tested whether this practice influences juror attitudes (Study 1). It also tested an intervention to prevent racially biased jury selection (Study 2).

Hypotheses: We predicted that participants exposed to the exclusion of Black prospective jurors would have more negative feelings compared with those who were not exposed to such exclusions (Study 1). We also predicted that participants taking on the role of a prosecutor would be more likely to exclude a Black (vs. White) prospective juror in a case with a Black defendant and that warnings against race-based decisions would result in elaborate race-neutral rationales for the exclusions (Study 2).

Method: In Study 1 (N = 228), participants witnessed a simulated jury selection process. For half of the participants, Black jurors were differentially excluded. In Study 2 (N = 298), participants selected between a Black and a White prospective juror for a case with a Black defendant.

Results: Exposure to race-based exclusions negatively impacted perceptions of fairness and emotional responses, especially for Black participants (Study 1). Participants were more likely to exclude a Black juror (vs. White juror) but gave race-neutral rationales for their decisions. The effect of race on juror selection was eliminated when participants were warned against using race as a basis for excluding jurors (Study 2).

Conclusions: Race-motivated exclusions affect not only Black defendants, by depriving them of their right to a jury of their peers, but also the jurors who remain to deliberate. A warning could be a viable intervention for curbing the influence of race on prosecutorial decisions during jury selection. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Objective: Prior research consistently demonstrates that defendants convicted at trial are sentenced more harshly than those who plead guilty. Additionally, a vast literature has shown that Black and Hispanic defendants, and especially young minority males, are particularly disadvantaged in sentencing, though these effects may be conditional on various legal and case-processing factors. However, it remains unclear how the mode of conviction might moderate these inequalities according to offenders' combined race/ethnicity, gender, and age.

Hypotheses: I expected that mode of conviction would moderate the joint effects of race/ethnicity, gender, and age on the imposition of a sentence to prison and on sentence length such that young minority males convicted at trial would receive more severe punishments than members of other subgroups.

Method: The analyses made use of data on defendants sentenced for noncapital felony crimes in Florida circuit courts over a 12-year period (N = 1,076,500). Hurdle regression models and marginal effects analysis were used.

Results: Greater sentencing disparities in absolute as well as relative terms between young minority males and other race/ethnicity, gender, and age subgroups were found among trial cases than among plea cases. Further, Black and Hispanic males were subjected to trial taxes that were substantially larger than those of other subgroups.

Conclusions: These findings suggest that defendants who plead guilty are generally sentenced according to predictable and standardized "going rates" of punishment, whereas the enhanced discretion afforded judges in trial cases as well as racialized "bad facts" about defendants that emerge at trial may drive inequalities in punishment. Thus, extralegal sentencing disparities tied to mode of conviction are an area in which criminal justice reform efforts might be directed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Objective: Our goal was to develop a framework to test for implicit racial bias in discretionary decisions made by community supervision agents in conditions with increasing information ambiguity.

Hypotheses: We reasoned that as in-person contact decreases, community supervision officers' specific knowledge of clients would be replaced by heuristics that lead to racially disproportionate outcomes in higher discretion events. Officers' implicit biases would lead to disproportionately higher technical violation rates among Black community corrections' clients when they have less personal contact, but we expected no analogous increase in nondiscretionary decisions.

Method: Using data from Black and White clients entering probation and postrelease supervision in North Carolina from 2012 through 2016, we estimated the difference in racial disparities in discretionary versus nondiscretionary decisions across five levels of supervision. We evaluated the robustness of our main fixed-effects model using an alternative regression discontinuity design.

Results: Racial disparities in discretionary decisions grew as supervision intensity decreased, and the bias was larger for women than men. There was no similar pattern of increased disparity for nondiscretionary decisions.

Conclusions: Criminal justice system actors have a great deal of discretion, particularly in how they deal with less serious criminal behavior. Although decentralized decisions are foundational to the function of the criminal justice system, they provide an opportunity for implicit bias to seep in. Shortcuts and mental heuristics are more influential when the decision-maker's mental resources are already strained-for instance, if someone is tired, distracted, or overworked. Therefore, limiting discretion and increasing oversight and accountability may reduce the impact of implicit bias on criminal justice system outcomes. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).