Jurors’ perceptions of scientific testimony: The role of gender and testimony complexity in trials involving DNA evidence

With continuous advancements in forensic science, expert testimony has become more common in criminal proceedings. This study (N = 170) sought to examine the combined influence of mock juror gender, expert gender, and testimony complexity in a case involving DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) evidence. Fin...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Evelyn M. Maeder, Laura A. McManus, Kendra J. McLaughlin, Susan Yamamoto, Hannah Stewart
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Taylor & Francis Group 2016-12-01
Series:Cogent Psychology
Subjects:
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/23311908.2016.1264657
id doaj-a9563f887d854a80a3006939e8879730
record_format Article
spelling doaj-a9563f887d854a80a3006939e88797302021-03-18T16:21:44ZengTaylor & Francis GroupCogent Psychology2331-19082016-12-013110.1080/23311908.2016.12646571264657Jurors’ perceptions of scientific testimony: The role of gender and testimony complexity in trials involving DNA evidenceEvelyn M. Maeder0Laura A. McManus1Kendra J. McLaughlin2Susan Yamamoto3Hannah Stewart4Carleton UniversityCarleton UniversityCarleton UniversityCarleton UniversityCarleton UniversityWith continuous advancements in forensic science, expert testimony has become more common in criminal proceedings. This study (N = 170) sought to examine the combined influence of mock juror gender, expert gender, and testimony complexity in a case involving DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) evidence. Findings revealed that testimony complexity interacted with expert gender to influence verdict judgments. Participants were unaffected by testimony complexity when the expert was a man, but were more likely to convict when complex testimony was presented by a woman. In support of the heuristic-systematic model, expert gender elicited an effect only in high-complexity conditions—interestingly, this was exclusively the case for male mock jurors. Understanding how jurors cognitively process legal and extra-legal information may help legal actors (e.g., evidence experts, lawyers) communicate evidence and its legal relevance more effectively.http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/23311908.2016.1264657gendertestimony complexitydna evidenceverdict
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Evelyn M. Maeder
Laura A. McManus
Kendra J. McLaughlin
Susan Yamamoto
Hannah Stewart
spellingShingle Evelyn M. Maeder
Laura A. McManus
Kendra J. McLaughlin
Susan Yamamoto
Hannah Stewart
Jurors’ perceptions of scientific testimony: The role of gender and testimony complexity in trials involving DNA evidence
Cogent Psychology
gender
testimony complexity
dna evidence
verdict
author_facet Evelyn M. Maeder
Laura A. McManus
Kendra J. McLaughlin
Susan Yamamoto
Hannah Stewart
author_sort Evelyn M. Maeder
title Jurors’ perceptions of scientific testimony: The role of gender and testimony complexity in trials involving DNA evidence
title_short Jurors’ perceptions of scientific testimony: The role of gender and testimony complexity in trials involving DNA evidence
title_full Jurors’ perceptions of scientific testimony: The role of gender and testimony complexity in trials involving DNA evidence
title_fullStr Jurors’ perceptions of scientific testimony: The role of gender and testimony complexity in trials involving DNA evidence
title_full_unstemmed Jurors’ perceptions of scientific testimony: The role of gender and testimony complexity in trials involving DNA evidence
title_sort jurors’ perceptions of scientific testimony: the role of gender and testimony complexity in trials involving dna evidence
publisher Taylor & Francis Group
series Cogent Psychology
issn 2331-1908
publishDate 2016-12-01
description With continuous advancements in forensic science, expert testimony has become more common in criminal proceedings. This study (N = 170) sought to examine the combined influence of mock juror gender, expert gender, and testimony complexity in a case involving DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) evidence. Findings revealed that testimony complexity interacted with expert gender to influence verdict judgments. Participants were unaffected by testimony complexity when the expert was a man, but were more likely to convict when complex testimony was presented by a woman. In support of the heuristic-systematic model, expert gender elicited an effect only in high-complexity conditions—interestingly, this was exclusively the case for male mock jurors. Understanding how jurors cognitively process legal and extra-legal information may help legal actors (e.g., evidence experts, lawyers) communicate evidence and its legal relevance more effectively.
topic gender
testimony complexity
dna evidence
verdict
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/23311908.2016.1264657
work_keys_str_mv AT evelynmmaeder jurorsperceptionsofscientifictestimonytheroleofgenderandtestimonycomplexityintrialsinvolvingdnaevidence
AT lauraamcmanus jurorsperceptionsofscientifictestimonytheroleofgenderandtestimonycomplexityintrialsinvolvingdnaevidence
AT kendrajmclaughlin jurorsperceptionsofscientifictestimonytheroleofgenderandtestimonycomplexityintrialsinvolvingdnaevidence
AT susanyamamoto jurorsperceptionsofscientifictestimonytheroleofgenderandtestimonycomplexityintrialsinvolvingdnaevidence
AT hannahstewart jurorsperceptionsofscientifictestimonytheroleofgenderandtestimonycomplexityintrialsinvolvingdnaevidence
_version_ 1724215383847600128