More Severe Juror Sexual Abuse Strengthens Empathy for Child Sexual Abuse Victims: Meta-Analyses.

Abstract

Jones et al. (2020) showed that compared to non-abused others, sexually abused jurors are more likely to empathize with child sexual abuse (CSA) victims, perceive victims as credible, and convict defendants in CSA mock trials. We extend these findings by investigating effects of sexually abused mock jurors' abuse severity on CSA victim empathy and trial judgments. Data were derived from all known mock trial studies measuring mock juror abuse history (N = 7), including 361 undergraduate jurors. Meta-analyses examined effects of four separate abuse-severity indices: (a) emotional scarring from sexual abuse, (b) abuse frequency, (c) perpetrator relationship, and (d) age abuse began. Twenty separate meta-analyses revealed that the more severe mock jurors' victimization was, the more empathy they had for child victims of sexual abuse generally. Although Jones et al. (2020) showed that victims are more likely than non-victims to vote guilty in CSA cases, we found that, among victims, abuse severity has no additional effect on guilt. Thus, attorneys will not achieve a legitimate legal goal by questioning victims about intimate details of their abuse during jury selection. Moreover, because victimization is one of many unique experiences from which jurors can draw during deliberation, it is important not to disproportionately exclude these individuals as jurors.