Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Sep 3:12:699077.
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.699077. eCollection 2021.

The Interactive Effects of Race and Expert Testimony on Jurors' Perceptions of Recanted Confessions

Logan Ewanation  1 , Evelyn M Maeder  2
Affiliations

The Interactive Effects of Race and Expert Testimony on Jurors' Perceptions of Recanted Confessions

Logan Ewanation et al. Front Psychol. .

Abstract

We examined the effect of defendant race and expert testimony on jurors' perceptions of recanted confessions. Participants (591 jury-eligible community members) read a first-degree murder trial transcript in which defendant race (Black/White) and expert testimony (present/absent) were manipulated. They provided verdicts and answered questions regarding the confession and expert testimony. When examining the full sample, we observed no significant main effects or interactions of defendant race or expert testimony. When exclusively examining White participants, we observed a significant interaction between expert testimony and defendant race on verdicts. When the defendant was White, there was no significant effect of expert testimony, but when the defendant was Black, jurors were significantly more likely to acquit when given expert testimony. These findings support the watchdog hypothesis, such that White jurors are more receptive to legally relevant evidence when the defendant is Black.

Keywords: confession evidence; defendant race; expert testimony; juries; juror decision-making; recanted confessions; watchdog hypothesis.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
Ratings of voluntariness of confession by defendant race and expert testimony for White participants.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Alhabash S., Hales K., Baek J. H., Oh H. J. (2014). Effects of race, visual anonymity, and social category salience on online dating outcomes. Comput. Hum. Behav. 35 22–32. 10.1016/j.chb.2014.02.016 - DOI
    1. Appleby S. C., Kassin S. M. (2016). When self-report trumps science: effects of confessions, DNA, and prosecutorial theories on perceptions of guilt. Psychol. Public Policy Law 22 127–140. 10.1037/law0000080 - DOI
    1. Baker M. A., Fox P., Wingrove T. (2016). Crowdsourcing as a forensic psychology research tool. Am. J. For. Psychol. 34 37–50.
    1. Bertrand M., Mullainathan S. (2004). Are Emily and Greg more employable than Lakisha and Jamal? A field experiment on labor market discrimination. Am. Econ. Rev. 94 991–1013. 10.1257/0002828042002561 - DOI
    1. Blandon-Gitlin I., Sperry K., Leo R. (2011). Jurors believe interrogation tactics are not likely to elicit false confessions: will expert witness testimony inform them otherwise? Psychol. Crime Law 17 239–260. 10.1080/10683160903113699 - DOI

LinkOut - more resources