login

Ambiguity and Guilt Determinations: A Modern Racism Perspective<sup>1</sup>

Journal of Applied Social PsychologyPublished 1 November 1991
Jeffrey E. Pfeifer, James R. P. Ogloff
Citations99
SJR quartileQ2
SJR score1.02
SNIP1.12

Abstract

Studies documenting the existence of prejudice in simulated juror ratings of guilt may not be directly generalizable to legal applications due to a failure to include jury instructions. Jury instructions specifying the conditions required to find a defendant guilty may serve to dissipate juror's overt prejudices. In order to investigate this hypothesis, participants read a transcript of a trial in which the race of the victim and the defendant were varied. In addition, half the participants were given jury instructions which specified the elements of the crime, and noted that in order to find the defendant guilty each element had to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Participants were then asked to rate the guilt of the defendant. Results replicated earlier studies which found that participants overwhelmingly rate black defendants guiltier than white defendants, especially when the victim is white. However, these differences disappeared when participants were provided with jury instructions. The findings are discussed with regard to the theory of modern racism.

Keywords

Social SciencesEconomics, Econometrics and Finance