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.

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

The Impact of Mental Health Labels, Gender, and Relationship Type on Mock Jurors' Perceptions and Verdicts in a Case of Intimate Partner Violence

Mock Juror Perceptions of Rape Victims

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

Changes in Certitude, Adherence, and Attitude: Immediate Effects of Rape Myth Intervention on Jurors in a Mock Trial.

Bio-behavioral scientific evidence alters judges' sentencing decision-making: A quantitative analysis

Gender differences in jurors' perceptions of infanticide involving disabled and non-disabled infant victims

The Role of Defendant Gender and PTSD Diagnosis in a Battered Spouse Case

White mock jurors' moral emotional responses to viewing female victim photographs depend on the victim's race.

“She Is his Girlfriend—I Believe this Is a Different Situation”: Gender Differences in Perceptions of the Legality of Intimate Partner Rape

The Impact of Rape Myth Education on Jury Decision-Making: A Systematic Review

What are the chances? – Validity assessment and the cumulative binomial distribution in the evaluation of fitness to stand trial

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

Perceptions of bias and credibility of male and female clinical psychologist and psychiatrist expert witnesses presenting clinical information in the courtroom

The Impact of Defendant Gender and Attractiveness on Juror Decision-Making in a Sexual Offense Case

The emotional child witness: effects on juror decision-making

Juror Perceptions of Bystander and Victim Intoxication by Different Substances

Impact of risk assessment on judges' fairness in sentencing relatively poor defendants

The Other Side of the Coin: Individuals Diagnosed with Schizophrenia as Victims of Crime and Violence

Does Ambivalent Sexism Influence Verdicts for Heterosexual and Homosexual Defendants in a Self-Defense Case?

Tipsy Testimonies: The Effect of Alcohol Intoxication Status, Crime Role and Juror Characteristics on Mock Jury Decision‐Making