Eleftherios Kipoulas , Ian Edwards , Ratko Radakovic , Peter Ilmari Beazley
{"title":"对在法庭上提供临床信息的男性和女性临床心理学家和精神病学家专家证人的偏见和可信度的看法","authors":"Eleftherios Kipoulas , Ian Edwards , Ratko Radakovic , Peter Ilmari Beazley","doi":"10.1016/j.ijlp.2024.102016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Expert witness credentials and gender have independently been shown to influence jurors' perceptions of expert witness credibility and legal decision-making. This study examined how manipulations of expert witness gender (Male/Female) and profession (Consultant Clinical Psychologist/Consultant Psychiatrist) together affected mock jurors' perceptions of expert witness credibility, judgements, and decision-making. Mock jurors (<em>N</em> = 182; 80.9 % were White) were recruited from England and Wales and were randomly assigned to watch a video-recorded mock expert witness testimony. Participants rated the expert witness using the Witness Credibility Scale and reported the likelihood of assigning the defendant to a guilty verdict. Results showed significant interaction effects of expert witness gender and profession on jurors' perceptions of their likeability, trustworthiness, knowledge, and total credibility. Male psychiatrists, followed by female clinical psychologists, received the highest scores in most credibility variables. Varied main effects of expert witness gender and profession on credibility were also found. Overall, jurors' ratings of expert witness credibility, when controlled by the expert's gender and profession, predicted jurors' determination of guilt. This study provides evidence of a potential interaction effect between profession and gender in expert witness credibility and supports existing research linking credibility with ultimate decision-making. More research is needed to understand jurors' unconscious biases and cognitive processes in making legal decisions.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47930,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Law and Psychiatry","volume":"96 ","pages":"Article 102016"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160252724000657/pdfft?md5=d513bed6054e8c1ec0330e144eab9f7b&pid=1-s2.0-S0160252724000657-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Perceptions of bias and credibility of male and female clinical psychologist and psychiatrist expert witnesses presenting clinical information in the courtroom\",\"authors\":\"Eleftherios Kipoulas , Ian Edwards , Ratko Radakovic , Peter Ilmari Beazley\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ijlp.2024.102016\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Expert witness credentials and gender have independently been shown to influence jurors' perceptions of expert witness credibility and legal decision-making. This study examined how manipulations of expert witness gender (Male/Female) and profession (Consultant Clinical Psychologist/Consultant Psychiatrist) together affected mock jurors' perceptions of expert witness credibility, judgements, and decision-making. Mock jurors (<em>N</em> = 182; 80.9 % were White) were recruited from England and Wales and were randomly assigned to watch a video-recorded mock expert witness testimony. Participants rated the expert witness using the Witness Credibility Scale and reported the likelihood of assigning the defendant to a guilty verdict. Results showed significant interaction effects of expert witness gender and profession on jurors' perceptions of their likeability, trustworthiness, knowledge, and total credibility. Male psychiatrists, followed by female clinical psychologists, received the highest scores in most credibility variables. Varied main effects of expert witness gender and profession on credibility were also found. Overall, jurors' ratings of expert witness credibility, when controlled by the expert's gender and profession, predicted jurors' determination of guilt. This study provides evidence of a potential interaction effect between profession and gender in expert witness credibility and supports existing research linking credibility with ultimate decision-making. More research is needed to understand jurors' unconscious biases and cognitive processes in making legal decisions.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47930,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Law and Psychiatry\",\"volume\":\"96 \",\"pages\":\"Article 102016\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160252724000657/pdfft?md5=d513bed6054e8c1ec0330e144eab9f7b&pid=1-s2.0-S0160252724000657-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Law and Psychiatry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160252724000657\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Law and Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160252724000657","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
Perceptions of bias and credibility of male and female clinical psychologist and psychiatrist expert witnesses presenting clinical information in the courtroom
Expert witness credentials and gender have independently been shown to influence jurors' perceptions of expert witness credibility and legal decision-making. This study examined how manipulations of expert witness gender (Male/Female) and profession (Consultant Clinical Psychologist/Consultant Psychiatrist) together affected mock jurors' perceptions of expert witness credibility, judgements, and decision-making. Mock jurors (N = 182; 80.9 % were White) were recruited from England and Wales and were randomly assigned to watch a video-recorded mock expert witness testimony. Participants rated the expert witness using the Witness Credibility Scale and reported the likelihood of assigning the defendant to a guilty verdict. Results showed significant interaction effects of expert witness gender and profession on jurors' perceptions of their likeability, trustworthiness, knowledge, and total credibility. Male psychiatrists, followed by female clinical psychologists, received the highest scores in most credibility variables. Varied main effects of expert witness gender and profession on credibility were also found. Overall, jurors' ratings of expert witness credibility, when controlled by the expert's gender and profession, predicted jurors' determination of guilt. This study provides evidence of a potential interaction effect between profession and gender in expert witness credibility and supports existing research linking credibility with ultimate decision-making. More research is needed to understand jurors' unconscious biases and cognitive processes in making legal decisions.
期刊介绍:
The International Journal of Law and Psychiatry is intended to provide a multi-disciplinary forum for the exchange of ideas and information among professionals concerned with the interface of law and psychiatry. There is a growing awareness of the need for exploring the fundamental goals of both the legal and psychiatric systems and the social implications of their interaction. The journal seeks to enhance understanding and cooperation in the field through the varied approaches represented, not only by law and psychiatry, but also by the social sciences and related disciplines.