Abstract:Journal of Interpersonal Violence, Ahead of Print. We sought to test the effects of sexual assault form and complainant/defendant gender on jurors' perceptions of the prototypicality of a sexual assault case, complainant, and defendant. We examined whether these perceived prototypicality measures predict mock jurors' complainant/defendant blame and credibility assessments and if these assessments predict verdict decisions in a simulated sexual assault trial. We predicted that the female complainant–male defendant condition, vaginal intercourse condition, and their combination would be perceived as more prototypical than their counterparts, which would predict blame/credibility assessments, ultimately predicting verdict. Mock jurors (N = 437) recruited via Prolific Academic read a trial transcript involving an alleged sexual assault (oral or vaginal sex forced onto the complainant) with a female complainant–male defendant or a male complainant–female defendant. They provided a verdict and assessed the perceived prototypicality of the case/complainant/defendant, provided blame/credibility assessments for the complainant/defendant, and responded to rape myth questionnaires. Sexual assault form did not significantly affect any of our outcomes. Mock jurors perceived the male complainant–female defendant condition as less prototypical of a sexual assault case/complainant/defendant than the female complainant–male defendant condition, resulting in negative evaluations of the complainant, favorable evaluations of the defendant, and lowered probability of conviction. Simultaneously, for fixed levels of prototypicality, the female complainant received more negative evaluations, and the male defendant received more favorable evaluations, which lowered the probability of conviction; mock jurors' rape myth acceptance moderated this effect. Rape myths were predictive of decision-making in cases involving a female complainant, and male rape myths were predictive in cases involving a male complainant. Results demonstrate that prototypicality is a mechanism behind mock jurors' decisions in sexual assault trials and elucidate the distinctive role of prototypes and rape myths on juror decision-making, with practical implications for the field of psychology and the criminal legal system.

[Autopsy results in surgical-radiotherapeutic treatment of bladder carcinoma--conclusions for optimal radiologic therapy].

The role of perceived defendant criminality on attributions and case outcomes

Judges’ Perceptions of Systemic Racism in the Criminal Justice System

Race, Culpability, and Defendant Plea-Bargaining Decisions: An Experimental Simulation

Prolonged postoperative apnea complicating gynecologic surgery; atypical cholinesterase and myasthenia gravis.

Detecting Racial Bias in Jury Selection

The effect of confirmation bias and racial stereotypes on perceptions of guilt and interrogation strategy decisions

Perceptions of Anti-Black Bias in the Criminal Justice System Contribute to Pro-Black (Versus White) Bias in Criminal Justice Research

Discrimination in Sentencing: Showing Remorse and the Intersection of Race and Gender

Sex Disparities in Sentencing and Judges’ Beliefs: A Vignette Approach

Racial Sentencing Disparities and Differential Progression Through the Criminal Justice System: Evidence From Linked Federal and State Court Data

Effects of toasting procedures on the levels of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in toasted bread.

Mental health in the courtroom: how victim mental health status impacts juror decision-making in a rape case

The Role of Complainant/Defendant Gender and Form of Sexual Assault on Jurors' Perceptions of Prototypicality and Verdicts

Lung Cancer Screening : A New Era February 09

Race and Stereotypes Matter When You Ask About Conduct Problems: Implications for Violence Risk Assessment in Juvenile Justice Settings

The impact of misinformation presented during jury deliberation on juror memory and decision-making

Investigating racial disparities in violence risk assessment using the Spousal Assault Risk Assessment Guide–Version 3 (SARA-V3): Structured professional judgment ratings and recidivism among Indigenous and non-Indigenous individuals.

Sentencing goals, causal attributions, ideology, and personality.

Mock Juror Perceptions of Rape Victims

Evidence-based sentencing: Public openness and opposition to using gender, age, and race as risk factors for recidivism.