Wang Yan, Stevenson Margaret C
University of Chicago, United States of America.
Kenyon College, United States of America.
Child Abuse Negl. 2025 Sep;167:107568. doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2025.107568. Epub 2025 Jun 18.
Child sexual abuse (CSA) is a risk factor for mental illness, which might influence jurors' judgments in CSA trials.
We apply expectation violation theory to explore the influence of victim mental illness and expert testimony on mock jurors' case judgments in a CSA mock trial.
We expected mock jurors would perceive an alleged CSA victim with a mental illness diagnosis of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) or depression as more plausibly abused than a victim with no diagnosis, and in turn, be more conviction-prone. We also expected that expert psychologist testimony (vs. no expert testimony) would elicit greater pro-victim case judgments (e.g., guilt).
Participants (N = 235, M = 39; 52 % women; 64.5 % White) were recruited on Prolific.
Participants rendered case judgments after reading a summarized CSA mock trial in which the victim's mental illness and a psychologist's expert testimony presence were experimentally manipulated in a 3 (victim mental illness diagnosis: PTSD, depression, no diagnosis) X 2 (expert testimony: present vs. absent) between-subjects design.
Although there were no effects of expert testimony, mock jurors perceived the defendant as less credible (M = ±0.44, SE = 0.18, p = .035, 95 % CIs[-0.8616, -0.0251]), and were more likely to convict (M = ±23.93, SE = 9.83, p = .041, 95 % CIs[0.7329, 47.1296]) when the victim was diagnosed with PTSD versus depression or no mental illness. Perceived defendant credibility mediated the effect of victim PTSD diagnosis on increased conviction rates, Indirect Effect = 4.93(2.87), 95 % CIs[0.37, 11.46].
These results suggest that victim PTSD diagnoses might increase convictions in CSA cases.
儿童性虐待（CSA）是精神疾病的一个风险因素，这可能会影响CSA审判中陪审员的判断。
我们应用期望违背理论，在CSA模拟审判中探讨受害者精神疾病和专家证词对模拟陪审员案件判断的影响。
我们预计模拟陪审员会认为，被诊断患有创伤后应激障碍（PTSD）或抑郁症的CSA受害者比未被诊断的受害者更有可能遭受虐待，进而更倾向于定罪。我们还预计，专家心理学家的证词（与无专家证词相比）会引发更多支持受害者的案件判断（例如有罪）。
参与者（N = 235，M = 39；52%为女性；64.5%为白人）通过Prolific招募。
参与者在阅读一份CSA模拟审判总结后做出案件判断，在该模拟审判中，受害者的精神疾病和心理学家的专家证词的呈现情况在一个3（受害者精神疾病诊断：PTSD、抑郁症、无诊断）×2（专家证词：有 vs. 无）的被试间设计中进行了实验性操纵。
虽然专家证词没有产生影响，但当受害者被诊断为PTSD而非抑郁症或无精神疾病时，模拟陪审员认为被告的可信度较低（M = ±0.44，SE = 0.18，p = .035，95%置信区间[-0.8616，-0.0251]），并且更有可能定罪（M = ±23.93，SE = 9.83，p = .041，95%置信区间[0.7329，47.1296]）。感知到的被告可信度介导了受害者PTSD诊断对定罪率增加的影响，间接效应 = 4.93(2.87)，95%置信区间[0.37，11.46]。
这些结果表明，受害者的PTSD诊断可能会增加CSA案件中的定罪率。
