Department of Clinical Psychology and Psychological Therapies, Norwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich Research Park, Norwich NR4 7TJ, United Kingdom; Cambridgeshire and Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK.
UEA Law School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, Research Park, Norwich NR4 7TJ, United Kingdom.
Int J Law Psychiatry. 2024 Sep-Oct;96:102016. doi: 10.1016/j.ijlp.2024.102016. Epub 2024 Aug 29.
Expert witness credentials and gender have independently been shown to influence jurors' perceptions of expert witness credibility and legal decision-making. This study examined how manipulations of expert witness gender (Male/Female) and profession (Consultant Clinical Psychologist/Consultant Psychiatrist) together affected mock jurors' perceptions of expert witness credibility, judgements, and decision-making. Mock jurors (N = 182; 80.9 % were White) were recruited from England and Wales and were randomly assigned to watch a video-recorded mock expert witness testimony. Participants rated the expert witness using the Witness Credibility Scale and reported the likelihood of assigning the defendant to a guilty verdict. Results showed significant interaction effects of expert witness gender and profession on jurors' perceptions of their likeability, trustworthiness, knowledge, and total credibility. Male psychiatrists, followed by female clinical psychologists, received the highest scores in most credibility variables. Varied main effects of expert witness gender and profession on credibility were also found. Overall, jurors' ratings of expert witness credibility, when controlled by the expert's gender and profession, predicted jurors' determination of guilt. This study provides evidence of a potential interaction effect between profession and gender in expert witness credibility and supports existing research linking credibility with ultimate decision-making. More research is needed to understand jurors' unconscious biases and cognitive processes in making legal decisions.
专家证人的资历和性别已被证明独立影响陪审员对专家证人可信度和法律决策的看法。本研究考察了专家证人性别(男性/女性)和专业(顾问临床心理学家/顾问精神科医生)的操纵如何共同影响模拟陪审员对专家证人可信度、判断和决策的看法。从英格兰和威尔士招募了模拟陪审员(N=182;80.9%为白人),并随机分配观看录制的模拟专家证人证言。参与者使用证人可信度量表对专家证人进行评分,并报告将被告定罪的可能性。结果表明,专家证人的性别和专业对陪审员对其好感度、可信度、知识和总体可信度的看法存在显著的交互效应。精神科男医生,其次是临床女心理学家,在大多数可信度变量中得分最高。还发现专家证人性别和专业对可信度有不同的主要影响。总体而言,当控制专家的性别和专业时,陪审员对专家证人可信度的评价预测了他们对有罪的决定。这项研究提供了专家证人可信度中专业和性别之间潜在交互作用的证据,并支持了将可信度与最终决策联系起来的现有研究。需要进一步研究以了解陪审员在做出法律决策时的无意识偏见和认知过程。