Behavioral Sciences & the Law最新文献

{"title":"The Influence of Victim Blame Statements and Expert Testimony on Jury Decision Making During Cases of Sexual Assault","authors":"Olivia N. Grella,&nbsp;Kayla A. Burd","doi":"10.1002/bsl.70042","DOIUrl":"10.1002/bsl.70042","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Rape myths are pervasive beliefs about sex crimes that can significantly influence trial outcomes. Expert testimony has been proposed as a method to mitigate the effect of rape myths within trials, but research to date is mixed. The purpose of this study was to examine the influence of the presence and content of expert testimony in a criminal trial of rape. Participants (<i>N</i> = 155) were randomly assigned to one of three conditions (i.e., no expert testimony, general expert testimony regarding rape myths, specific expert testimony discussing a particular rape myth). Participants rendered a verdict and answered questions regarding perceptions of the victim and defendant (i.e., believability, credibility, and responsibility). Though expert testimony did not influence verdicts, perceptions of the victim (e.g., credibility, confidence that the victim was raped) were most favorable when participants were exposed to the general expert testimony. Expert testimony did not impact perceptions of the defendant. Results indicate that expert testimony may be effective at influencing certain perceptions of the victim. Future research should continue to investigate other ways that expert testimony may be effective in mitigating the influence of rape myths.</p>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":47926,"journal":{"name":"Behavioral Sciences & the Law","volume":"44 2","pages":"281-295"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2026-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146067644","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Inoculation in the Courtroom: The Effect of Judicial Direction Timing on Mock Juror Decisions in a Rape Trial","authors":"Michelle Wieberneit,&nbsp;Lies Notebaert,&nbsp;Joseph Clare,&nbsp;Hilde Tubex","doi":"10.1002/bsl.70041","DOIUrl":"10.1002/bsl.70041","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 <p>In Australia, judges may issue judicial directions during a trial to counter the rape myth that resistance is required for a rape to be legitimate, despite many victim-survivors freezing. Drawing on inoculation theory, this study tested whether the timing of such directions influences verdicts and perceptions of complainant credibility in an acquaintance rape trial. Australian community members (<i>N</i> = 250) were randomly assigned to receive directions before, during, after, or both before and after cross-examination, or to a no-direction control. Judicial direction timing had no significant effect on verdicts or complainant believability. Higher rape myth acceptance was associated with a lower likelihood of conviction, with men scoring significantly higher on rape myth acceptance than women. Exploratory analyses showed that complainant believability predicted verdict outcomes, while prior jury service was associated with a lower likelihood of conviction. These findings suggest that rape myth acceptance may outweigh the influence of judicial directions.</p>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":47926,"journal":{"name":"Behavioral Sciences & the Law","volume":"44 2","pages":"332-347"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2026-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146167259","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Disaggregating the Monolith: Exploring Differences in Rape Myth Acceptance Among People With Varied LGBTQ+ Identities","authors":"Suzanne St. George,&nbsp;Amber Amin,&nbsp;Skyler Morgan","doi":"10.1002/bsl.70038","DOIUrl":"10.1002/bsl.70038","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Much of the rape myth literature ignores the experiences of LGBTQ+ people, and studies that do consider LGBTQ+ people's attitudes commonly treat LGBTQ+ respondents as a homogenous group or rely on small sample sizes that limit LGBTQ+ heterogeneity. In the current study, we use a large sample (<i>n</i>-total = 2962; <i>n</i>-LGBTQ+ = 634) composed of students and MTurk workers to explore rape myth acceptance among people with cisgender, transgender, heterosexual, gay, lesbian, bisexual, queer, and other identities. We found that LGBTQ+ people had higher RMA than cisgender-heterosexual people. Disaggregating the LGBTQ+ group revealed important and unexpected intragroup differences. Notably, cisgender bisexual men had the highest RMA followed by heterosexual men and trans people. Given the empirical relationship between RMA and sexual assault victimization, help-seeking, and criminal-legal responses, elevated RMA among bisexual men and trans people indicates a need for targeted, identity-specific and LGBTQ+-sensitive rape prevention programs and victim support services.</p>","PeriodicalId":47926,"journal":{"name":"Behavioral Sciences & the Law","volume":"44 2","pages":"235-248"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2026-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/bsl.70038","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145999403","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Transgender Individuals and the Law: Part II Introductory Essay","authors":"Margarita Abi Zeid Daou,&nbsp;Alan R. Felthous","doi":"10.1002/bsl.70031","DOIUrl":"10.1002/bsl.70031","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47926,"journal":{"name":"Behavioral Sciences & the Law","volume":"44 2","pages":"296-301"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2026-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147628601","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Public Perceptions of Marital Rape: Does Level of Force Used Have an Impact?","authors":"Leanne Hanney,&nbsp;Amy Shelford,&nbsp;Andy Guppy","doi":"10.1002/bsl.70036","DOIUrl":"10.1002/bsl.70036","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Research indicates that marital rape is viewed by the public as less harmful to a victim than stranger/acquaintance rape. The aim of the study is to extend the research conducted by Robinson in 2017, investigating how levels of force influence perceptions of marital rape. The study also examines how rape perception is influenced by rape myth acceptance and attitudes towards women. The current study improves on previous work by controlling for individual differences across groups using a repeated-measures design. The results indicate that as the level of force increases the perception of marital rape increases. Positive attitudes towards women and low rape myth acceptance are also found to have a positive impact on perceptions of marital rape. Based on these findings, it is possible to recommend that further awareness of legislation regarding coercion and marital rape is required within the public domain.</p>","PeriodicalId":47926,"journal":{"name":"Behavioral Sciences & the Law","volume":"44 2","pages":"224-234"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2026-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13053914/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145946367","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Sex Trafficking Myth Reduction: Evaluating an Educational Approach to Reducing Victim Blaming and Increasing Victim Empathy","authors":"Dara Mojtahedi,&nbsp;Gemma Hewitt,&nbsp;Sophie Fitton","doi":"10.1002/bsl.70034","DOIUrl":"10.1002/bsl.70034","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This study examined the effectiveness of a brief educational intervention designed to reduce sex trafficking (ST) myth acceptance. Using a 2 × 2 mixed design, participants (<i>N</i> = 189) viewed either an educational video addressing common ST myths or a control video on human memory. Measures of ST myth acceptance and victim empathy were collected before, immediately after, and 1 month following the intervention. Participants also evaluated a vignette describing an alleged ST case and responded to items assessing empathy, victim blaming, and perceptions of the defendant's guilt. The intervention did not significantly reduce ST myth acceptance or influence vignette-based judgements, which may reflect a ceiling effect given participants' already supportive baseline attitudes. However, a protective effect emerged over time: participants in the intervention condition maintained supportive victim attitudes at follow-up, whereas control participants demonstrated increased victim blaming and decreased empathy.</p>","PeriodicalId":47926,"journal":{"name":"Behavioral Sciences & the Law","volume":"44 2","pages":"181-192"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2026-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13053908/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145795278","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Exploring Bankruptcy Attorneys' Experiences With Clients Exhibiting Suicidality: Challenges and Recommendations for Suicide Prevention","authors":"John R. Blosnich,&nbsp;Jeanne M. Ward,&nbsp;Melissa Perkins,&nbsp;Marissa Ding,&nbsp;Susan De Luca","doi":"10.1002/bsl.70033","DOIUrl":"10.1002/bsl.70033","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Bankruptcy and financial distress commonly precipitate suicidal crises, putting bankruptcy attorneys in potentially difficult situations with clients. This qualitative study explored attorneys' experiences with clients' risk for suicide and attorneys' recommendations for suicide prevention. Bankruptcy attorneys and trustees (<i>n</i> = 11) were recruited via outreach to attorney groups (e.g., National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys). Semi-structured interviews explored clients' distress, responses to clients' suicidal disclosures, and previous suicide prevention training. The research team established a codebook from transcribed interviews within Dedoose software, using peer debriefing and consensus building to iteratively identify themes. Nearly all attorneys had experiences with clients discussing suicide, but most did not know how to intervene. Common themes included clients' co-occurring stressors (e.g., divorce, unemployment), destigmatizing the bankruptcy process, and navigating attorney-client privilege. Major themes for prevention were correcting misconceptions about and destigmatizing bankruptcy and suicide prevention training that is sensitive to the context of the legal profession.</p>","PeriodicalId":47926,"journal":{"name":"Behavioral Sciences & the Law","volume":"44 2","pages":"193-203"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2026-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13053906/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145811628","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Before Arrest: The Effects of Rape Myths on Evidence Collection Decisions in Sexual Assault Investigations","authors":"Suzanne St. George","doi":"10.1002/bsl.70037","DOIUrl":"10.1002/bsl.70037","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Rape myths related to victim behavior and credibility influence police decisions, contributing to attrition at the unfound and arrest stages. How rape myth influence earlier investigative decisions (e.g., interview witnesses) is unknown. Addressing this gap is important, because evidence-gathering decisions are critical for successful case processing. I draw on the focal concerns framework and use data from the Los Angeles Sexual Assault Study (<i>n</i> = 616; Spohn and Tellis 2014) to quantitatively assess the effects of rape myths on three investigative decisions: interviewing witnesses, conducting pretext phone calls, and interviewing suspects. These tactics were underused. As predicted, police were more likely to interview witnesses when victims were credible and cases involved “real rape” characteristics. Other hypotheses were not supported. Findings suggest that police need more resources for investigations and more training on the unique nature of sexual violence, types of evidence most useful at trial, and effective investigative tactics.</p>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":47926,"journal":{"name":"Behavioral Sciences & the Law","volume":"44 2","pages":"265-280"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2026-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146012812","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Correction to “Are Risk Assessment Tools More Accurate Than Unstructured Judgments in Predicting Violent, Any, and Sexual Offending? A Meta-Analysis of Direct Comparison Studies.”","authors":"","doi":"10.1002/bsl.70026","DOIUrl":"10.1002/bsl.70026","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;Viljoen, J. L., Goossens, I., Monjazeb, S., Cochrane, D. M., Vargen, L. M., Jonnson, M. R., Blanchard, A. J. E., Li, S. M. Y., &amp; Jackson, J. R. (2025). Are risk assessment tools more accurate than unstructured judgments in predicting violent, any, and sexual offending? A meta-analysis of direct comparison studies. &lt;i&gt;Behavioral Sciences and the Law&lt;/i&gt;, 43, 75–113. https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.2698.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The above reference article was published with numerous instances of “redacted for blind review” or “author names redacted” throughout, though during the submission process complete, unblinded versions of the manuscript were provided. Below, we have outlined each instance of missing information in the published article and have provided the information to be added (in &lt;b&gt;bold&lt;/b&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;P. 78, Paragraph 3.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;“According to &lt;b&gt;our recent umbrella review&lt;/b&gt;, only one published meta-analysis has, in fact, compared the accuracy of unstructured judgment to risk assessment tools in the prediction of recidivism (&lt;b&gt;Viljoen et al., 2021&lt;/b&gt;).”&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;P. 78, Paragraph 4.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;“This lack of control is problematic because, based on &lt;b&gt;our recent umbrella review&lt;/b&gt;, 89% of studies included in prior reviews on unstructured risk judgments showed a high risk of bias or problems with statistical conclusion validity (e.g., a failure to use appropriate statistical tests to compare unstructured approaches and tools; &lt;b&gt;Viljoen et al., 2021&lt;/b&gt;).”&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;P. 80, Section 2.1, Paragraph 1.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;“…(Preregistration Number = &lt;b&gt;CRD42020187585&lt;/b&gt;; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42020187585).”&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;P. 81, Section 2.3, Paragraph 2.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;“…(b) reviewed the systematic reviews and primary studies identified in &lt;b&gt;Viljoen et al. (2021)…”&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;P. 81, Section 2.4, paragraph 1.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;“Two raters (&lt;b&gt;J.R.J., S.M.Y.L.&lt;/b&gt;) independently screened the abstracts and titles of each study to determine if it was relevant.”&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;P.82, Section 2.5, Paragraph 1.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;“After a study was screened in (&lt;i&gt;n&lt;/i&gt; = 59), two raters (&lt;b&gt;J.L.V., M.R.J.&lt;/b&gt;) conducted a full-text review by reading the study in its entirety to determine if it met inclusion criteria.”&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;P.83, Section 2.6, Paragraph 1.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;“Next, data from the included studies was extracted by four Ph.D. students (&lt;b&gt;D.C., I.G., L.M.V., S.M.&lt;/b&gt;). All raters had previously completed data extraction for a meta-review which included a similar data extraction form and the same risk of bias tool as the present meta-analysis (&lt;b&gt;Viljoen et al., 2021).”&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;P.83, Subsection 2.7.1, Paragraph 1.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;“A data extraction form was developed by using guidelines (e.g., Moons et al., 2014) and protocols from prior research (Viljoen et al., 2021).”&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;P. 85, Section 2.10, Paragraph 1.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;“Analyses were prespecified and included in our preregistration plan. The dataset (e.g., effect sizes for individual studies, syntax, and results) are available at https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/SKB3J. To help ensu","PeriodicalId":47926,"journal":{"name":"Behavioral Sciences & the Law","volume":"44 1","pages":"164-165"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2025-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12884873/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145744846","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Large Language Model (LLM) and Human Performance in Child Investigative Interviewing Question Formulation Tasks","authors":"Liisa Järvilehto,&nbsp;Yongjie Sun,&nbsp;Nami Aiba,&nbsp;Shumpei Haginoya,&nbsp;Hasse Hallström,&nbsp;Julia Korkman,&nbsp;Pekka Santtila","doi":"10.1002/bsl.70029","DOIUrl":"10.1002/bsl.70029","url":null,"abstract":"<p>We compared the performance of large language models (LLMs) and humans with various levels of expertise in child investigative interviewing on tasks related to question formulation. Two tasks were employed: a static Interview Excerpt Task where participants (60 psychologists, 60 naive participants, GPT-4, and Llama-2) formulated follow-up questions to 100 interview excerpts, and a dynamic Avatar Interviewing Task where participants (32 professionals, 32 students, and GPT-4) conducted 10-min interviews with AI-driven child avatars. In the dynamic task, LLMs used fewer recommended questions (<i>M</i> = 8.69 vs. 18.75) and more non-recommended questions (<i>M</i> = 17.69 vs. 6.81) than professionals. Conversely, in the static task, GPT-4 outperformed psychologists, using more invitations (67.8% vs. 5.4%) and fewer option-posing questions (3.7% vs. 31.4%). While LLMs demonstrated strong question formulation skills in controlled environments, they struggled with adaptive dialogs.</p>","PeriodicalId":47926,"journal":{"name":"Behavioral Sciences & the Law","volume":"44 1","pages":"142-163"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2025-12-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12865673/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145709823","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}