Effects of pretrial publicity on male and female jurors and judges in a mock rape trial.

A study explored influence of pretrial publicity and gender identity on verdicts and severity of sentence in a mock rape trial. Mock jurors and judges were exposed to four pretrial publicity conditions before watching a simulated rape trial. After viewing the trial, jurors rendered a verdict (guilty or not guilty) and judges prescribed a sentence. The Bem Sex-role Inventory was used to analyze gender identity and its relation to verdict and sentencing. Verdicts were not influenced by pretrial publicity, but sentencing was more severe following exposure of mock judges to pretrial publicity about a mistaken acquittal and less severe following exposure of these judges to pretrial publicity about a mistaken conviction. Subjects classified by the Bem inventory as feminine or androgynous rendered a verdict of "guilty" more often than subjects classified as masculine or undifferentiated. Men who rendered verdicts of "guilty" had less confidence in their judgments than men who found the defendant "not guilty." Conversely, women who found the defendant "not guilty" expressed less confidence than women who found the defendant "guilty." The findings are compared and contrasted with similar studies and discussed in regards to gender identity, subjects' characteristics, and mode of presentation.