Shielded perspectives: How visual attention moderates the link between social identity and biased judgments about police

IF 4.8 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL
Jennie Qu‐Lee, Emily Balcetis
{"title":"Shielded perspectives: How visual attention moderates the link between social identity and biased judgments about police","authors":"Jennie Qu‐Lee, Emily Balcetis","doi":"10.1111/spc3.12994","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Individuals from different social groups form divergent legal punishment decisions about police officers engaged in altercations with civilians despite viewing the same visual evidence. We review empirical and archival data in the legal domain to offer four vision‐based moderators of polarized legal judgments determined after viewing evidence with a focus on research relevant to police‐civilian altercations. We discuss how selective visual attention, flittering and staring tendencies, differences in cognitive engagement, and visual confirmation bias contribute to divergent legal decisions within and across social groups. By incorporating visual experience into models of legal decision‐making, we reconcile inconsistencies regarding the impact of social group identity on bias in police punishment.","PeriodicalId":53583,"journal":{"name":"Social and Personality Psychology Compass","volume":"43 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social and Personality Psychology Compass","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12994","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Individuals from different social groups form divergent legal punishment decisions about police officers engaged in altercations with civilians despite viewing the same visual evidence. We review empirical and archival data in the legal domain to offer four vision‐based moderators of polarized legal judgments determined after viewing evidence with a focus on research relevant to police‐civilian altercations. We discuss how selective visual attention, flittering and staring tendencies, differences in cognitive engagement, and visual confirmation bias contribute to divergent legal decisions within and across social groups. By incorporating visual experience into models of legal decision‐making, we reconcile inconsistencies regarding the impact of social group identity on bias in police punishment.
屏蔽视角:视觉注意力如何调节社会身份与对警察的偏见判断之间的联系
不同社会群体的个体在观看相同的视觉证据时,会对警察与平民发生口角的行为做出不同的法律惩罚决定。我们回顾了法律领域的实证数据和档案数据,提出了四种基于视觉的调节因素,以调节在观看证据后做出的两极化法律判断,重点关注与警民冲突相关的研究。我们讨论了选择性视觉注意力、闪烁和凝视倾向、认知参与的差异以及视觉确认偏差是如何在社会群体内部和之间造成不同法律决定的。通过将视觉经验纳入法律决策模型,我们调和了社会群体认同对警察处罚偏见影响的不一致之处。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Social and Personality Psychology Compass
Social and Personality Psychology Compass Psychology-Social Psychology
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
2.20%
发文量
59
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信