Mock Jurors' Determinations of Guilt in Sexual Offences Involving Male Victims: A Systematic Review.

Abstract

Research examining perceptions of male victims of sexual violence has been neglected, particularly regarding jury attitudes toward these victims. It is important to recognize whether jurors, as community decision-makers, hold falsehoods, stereotypes, and gendered beliefs about male victims of sexual violence and whether these beliefs affect their legal attitudes and verdict decisions. A systematic review of peer-reviewed, experimental studies published between 1980 and 2024 was conducted. A total of 11 databases, alongside ascendancy, descendancy, and gray literature searches across two additional platforms, were searched using 18 search strings, yielding 21 sources which met the pre-registered inclusion criteria. Reviewers assessed all sources in terms of quality using two separate measures. Synthesis of the reviewed sources suggests that mock jurors are typically less punitive toward defendants in sexual violence cases with male victims, compared to those with female victims. While half of the sources find no effect of victim gender on mock jurors' verdict decisions, this is accompanied by findings indicating that mock jurors hold harsher attitudes and beliefs toward male victims. Several sources also suggest that male victims' ethnicity, sexuality, and gender identity are additional characteristics that affect mock jury attitudes and legal outcomes. Mock jurors were typically more lenient toward alleged perpetrators of sexual violence and held harsher and more punitive attitudes toward Black, gay, or transgender male victims in sexual violence cases. Finally, we discuss implications for policy and practice, and recommendations for future research.