基于错误身份的错误定罪中种族差异的潜在原因:自身种族偏见和基于证据的怀疑的差异。

IF 2.4 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW
Jacqueline Katzman, Margaret Bull Kovera
{"title":"基于错误身份的错误定罪中种族差异的潜在原因:自身种族偏见和基于证据的怀疑的差异。","authors":"Jacqueline Katzman,&nbsp;Margaret Bull Kovera","doi":"10.1037/lhb0000503","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>We explored whether racial disparities in evidence-based suspicion (i.e., evidence of guilt prior to placement in a lineup) provide a better explanation of racial disparities in exonerations based on eyewitness misidentification than the own-race bias in eyewitness identifications.</p><p><strong>Hypotheses: </strong>We predicted that the own-race bias in identification accuracy would be insufficiently large to fully explain the racial disparities in wrongful convictions in cases with mistaken identification. We also predicted that possible racial disparities in the prior probability of suspect guilt before subjecting suspects to the risk of misidentification might better explain racial disparities in wrongful convictions.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>We conducted a meta-analysis on 54 effect sizes extracted from 16 studies (1,503 individual participants) that tested whether there was an own-race bias in eyewitness identifications using a design that varied the race of both the witnesses and the target faces (Black vs. White). We also constructed two curves that plotted the prior probability of suspect guilt against the posterior probability of guilt: one if an identification were to be obtained for a Black suspect and one if an identification were to be obtained for a White suspect.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participants, irrespective of their race, were better able to discriminate among previously seen White than Black targets. However, the differential accuracy rates for identifications of White versus Black suspects were too small to explain racial disparities in exoneration data on their own. However, racial disparities in evidence that police have against suspects before placing them in an identification procedure would likely explain more of the variance in racial disparities in mistaken identifications that lead to wrongful convictions.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Memory errors caused by the own-race bias are likely not the sole or even primary cause of racial disparities in misidentifications; rather, systemic bias in the amount of evidence that police have before placing a suspect at risk of misidentification likely explains more of the variance of racial disparities in wrongful convictions based on mistaken identifications. Requirements for evidence-based suspicion before placing suspects in an identification procedure are needed to prevent systemic racism in mistaken identifications. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":48230,"journal":{"name":"Law and Human Behavior","volume":"47 1","pages":"23-35"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Potential causes of racial disparities in wrongful convictions based on mistaken identifications: Own-race bias and differences in evidence-based suspicion.\",\"authors\":\"Jacqueline Katzman,&nbsp;Margaret Bull Kovera\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/lhb0000503\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>We explored whether racial disparities in evidence-based suspicion (i.e., evidence of guilt prior to placement in a lineup) provide a better explanation of racial disparities in exonerations based on eyewitness misidentification than the own-race bias in eyewitness identifications.</p><p><strong>Hypotheses: </strong>We predicted that the own-race bias in identification accuracy would be insufficiently large to fully explain the racial disparities in wrongful convictions in cases with mistaken identification. We also predicted that possible racial disparities in the prior probability of suspect guilt before subjecting suspects to the risk of misidentification might better explain racial disparities in wrongful convictions.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>We conducted a meta-analysis on 54 effect sizes extracted from 16 studies (1,503 individual participants) that tested whether there was an own-race bias in eyewitness identifications using a design that varied the race of both the witnesses and the target faces (Black vs. White). We also constructed two curves that plotted the prior probability of suspect guilt against the posterior probability of guilt: one if an identification were to be obtained for a Black suspect and one if an identification were to be obtained for a White suspect.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participants, irrespective of their race, were better able to discriminate among previously seen White than Black targets. However, the differential accuracy rates for identifications of White versus Black suspects were too small to explain racial disparities in exoneration data on their own. However, racial disparities in evidence that police have against suspects before placing them in an identification procedure would likely explain more of the variance in racial disparities in mistaken identifications that lead to wrongful convictions.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Memory errors caused by the own-race bias are likely not the sole or even primary cause of racial disparities in misidentifications; rather, systemic bias in the amount of evidence that police have before placing a suspect at risk of misidentification likely explains more of the variance of racial disparities in wrongful convictions based on mistaken identifications. Requirements for evidence-based suspicion before placing suspects in an identification procedure are needed to prevent systemic racism in mistaken identifications. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48230,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Law and Human Behavior\",\"volume\":\"47 1\",\"pages\":\"23-35\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Law and Human Behavior\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000503\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Law and Human Behavior","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000503","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

目的:我们探讨基于证据的怀疑中的种族差异(即,在被放置在一个队列之前的有罪证据)是否比基于目击者错误识别的自身种族偏见更好地解释了基于目击者错误识别的免责中的种族差异。假设:我们预测,在识别准确性方面的种族偏见不足以充分解释在错误识别案件中错误定罪的种族差异。我们还预测,在嫌疑人被误判之前,嫌疑人有罪的先验概率可能存在种族差异,这可能更好地解释错误定罪的种族差异。方法:我们对从16项研究(1503名个体参与者)中提取的54个效应量进行了荟萃分析,这些研究使用改变证人和目标面孔(黑人与白人)种族的设计来测试目击者识别中是否存在自己的种族偏见。我们还构建了两条曲线,绘制了犯罪嫌疑人的先验概率和犯罪嫌疑人的后验概率:一条是如果要获得黑人嫌疑人的身份证明,另一条是如果要获得白人嫌疑人的身份证明。结果:无论种族如何,参与者都能更好地区分之前见过的白人而不是黑人目标。然而,识别白人和黑人嫌疑人的准确率差异太小,不足以单独解释免罪数据中的种族差异。然而,警方在对嫌疑人进行身份识别之前掌握的证据中存在的种族差异,可能更多地解释了导致错误定罪的错误识别中存在的种族差异。结论:种族偏见导致的记忆错误可能不是种族误认差异的唯一甚至主要原因;相反,警方在将嫌疑人置于误判风险之前所掌握的证据数量上的系统性偏见,可能更多地解释了基于误判的错误定罪中种族差异的差异。在将嫌疑人置于识别程序之前,需要有基于证据的怀疑要求,以防止在错误识别中出现系统性的种族主义。(PsycInfo数据库记录(c) 2023 APA,版权所有)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Potential causes of racial disparities in wrongful convictions based on mistaken identifications: Own-race bias and differences in evidence-based suspicion.

Objective: We explored whether racial disparities in evidence-based suspicion (i.e., evidence of guilt prior to placement in a lineup) provide a better explanation of racial disparities in exonerations based on eyewitness misidentification than the own-race bias in eyewitness identifications.

Hypotheses: We predicted that the own-race bias in identification accuracy would be insufficiently large to fully explain the racial disparities in wrongful convictions in cases with mistaken identification. We also predicted that possible racial disparities in the prior probability of suspect guilt before subjecting suspects to the risk of misidentification might better explain racial disparities in wrongful convictions.

Method: We conducted a meta-analysis on 54 effect sizes extracted from 16 studies (1,503 individual participants) that tested whether there was an own-race bias in eyewitness identifications using a design that varied the race of both the witnesses and the target faces (Black vs. White). We also constructed two curves that plotted the prior probability of suspect guilt against the posterior probability of guilt: one if an identification were to be obtained for a Black suspect and one if an identification were to be obtained for a White suspect.

Results: Participants, irrespective of their race, were better able to discriminate among previously seen White than Black targets. However, the differential accuracy rates for identifications of White versus Black suspects were too small to explain racial disparities in exoneration data on their own. However, racial disparities in evidence that police have against suspects before placing them in an identification procedure would likely explain more of the variance in racial disparities in mistaken identifications that lead to wrongful convictions.

Conclusion: Memory errors caused by the own-race bias are likely not the sole or even primary cause of racial disparities in misidentifications; rather, systemic bias in the amount of evidence that police have before placing a suspect at risk of misidentification likely explains more of the variance of racial disparities in wrongful convictions based on mistaken identifications. Requirements for evidence-based suspicion before placing suspects in an identification procedure are needed to prevent systemic racism in mistaken identifications. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
8.00%
发文量
42
期刊介绍: Law and Human Behavior, the official journal of the American Psychology-Law Society/Division 41 of the American Psychological Association, is a multidisciplinary forum for the publication of articles and discussions of issues arising out of the relationships between human behavior and the law, our legal system, and the legal process. This journal publishes original research, reviews of past research, and theoretical studies from professionals in criminal justice, law, psychology, sociology, psychiatry, political science, education, communication, and other areas germane to the field.
×
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