Social cognitive processes explain bias in juror decisions.

IF 3.9 2区 医学 Q2 NEUROSCIENCES
Jaime J Castrellon, Shabnam Hakimi, Jacob M Parelman, Lun Yin, Jonathan R Law, Jesse A G Skene, David A Ball, Artemis Malekpour, Donald H Beskind, Neil Vidmar, John M Pearson, J H Pate Skene, R McKell Carter
{"title":"Social cognitive processes explain bias in juror decisions.","authors":"Jaime J Castrellon,&nbsp;Shabnam Hakimi,&nbsp;Jacob M Parelman,&nbsp;Lun Yin,&nbsp;Jonathan R Law,&nbsp;Jesse A G Skene,&nbsp;David A Ball,&nbsp;Artemis Malekpour,&nbsp;Donald H Beskind,&nbsp;Neil Vidmar,&nbsp;John M Pearson,&nbsp;J H Pate Skene,&nbsp;R McKell Carter","doi":"10.1093/scan/nsac057","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Jury decisions are among the most consequential social decisions in which bias plays a notable role. While courts take measures to reduce the influence of non-evidentiary factors, jurors may still incorporate biases into their decisions. One common bias, crime-type bias, is the extent to which the perceived strength of a prosecutor's case depends on the severity of the crime. Moral judgment, affect and social cognition have been proposed as core processes underlying this and other biases. Behavioral evidence alone has been insufficient to distinguish these explanations. To identify the mechanism underlying crime-type bias, we collected functional magnetic resonance imaging patterns of brain activation from mock jurors reading criminal scenarios. Brain patterns from crime-type bias were most similar to those associated with social cognition (mentalizing and racial bias) but not affect or moral judgment. Our results support a central role for social cognition in juror decisions and suggest that crime-type bias and cultural bias may arise from similar mechanisms.</p>","PeriodicalId":21789,"journal":{"name":"Social cognitive and affective neuroscience","volume":"18 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/ca/98/nsac057.PMC9949508.pdf","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social cognitive and affective neuroscience","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsac057","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Jury decisions are among the most consequential social decisions in which bias plays a notable role. While courts take measures to reduce the influence of non-evidentiary factors, jurors may still incorporate biases into their decisions. One common bias, crime-type bias, is the extent to which the perceived strength of a prosecutor's case depends on the severity of the crime. Moral judgment, affect and social cognition have been proposed as core processes underlying this and other biases. Behavioral evidence alone has been insufficient to distinguish these explanations. To identify the mechanism underlying crime-type bias, we collected functional magnetic resonance imaging patterns of brain activation from mock jurors reading criminal scenarios. Brain patterns from crime-type bias were most similar to those associated with social cognition (mentalizing and racial bias) but not affect or moral judgment. Our results support a central role for social cognition in juror decisions and suggest that crime-type bias and cultural bias may arise from similar mechanisms.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

社会认知过程解释了陪审员决策中的偏见。
陪审团的决定是最重要的社会决定之一,其中偏见起着显著的作用。虽然法院采取措施减少非证据因素的影响,但陪审员仍可能将偏见纳入其决定。一种常见的偏见,即犯罪类型偏见,是认为检察官案件的力度在多大程度上取决于罪行的严重性。道德判断、情感和社会认知被认为是这种偏见和其他偏见背后的核心过程。仅凭行为证据不足以区分这些解释。为了确定犯罪类型偏见的潜在机制,我们收集了模拟陪审员阅读犯罪场景时大脑激活的功能磁共振成像模式。犯罪类型偏见的大脑模式与社会认知(心理化和种族偏见)相关的大脑模式最相似,但与情感或道德判断不同。我们的研究结果支持了社会认知在陪审员决策中的核心作用,并表明犯罪类型偏见和文化偏见可能产生于类似的机制。
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
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
4.80%
发文量
62
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: SCAN will consider research that uses neuroimaging (fMRI, MRI, PET, EEG, MEG), neuropsychological patient studies, animal lesion studies, single-cell recording, pharmacological perturbation, and transcranial magnetic stimulation. SCAN will also consider submissions that examine the mediational role of neural processes in linking social phenomena to physiological, neuroendocrine, immunological, developmental, and genetic processes. Additionally, SCAN will publish papers that address issues of mental and physical health as they relate to social and affective processes (e.g., autism, anxiety disorders, depression, stress, effects of child rearing) as long as cognitive neuroscience methods are used.
×
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