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.

Jurors’ Responses to Expert Witness Testimony: The Effects of Gender Stereotypes

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

Female and Jury

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

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

Gender In-Group Bias: Evidence from Judicial Decisions

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

Women Experts and Gender Bias in Political Media

Gender Attitudes in the Judiciary: Evidence from US Circuit Courts

The Plaintiff Bias in Mock Civil Jury Decision Making: Consensus Requirements, Information Format and Amount of Consensus

Neurolinguistic Priming and Gender Stereotype Effects in the Ratings of Justice vs. Authority Moral Violations: Republicans and Democrats

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

A meta-analysis of gender stereotypes and bias in experimental simulations of employment decision making.

Effects of biological and psychological gender, age cohort, and interviewer gender on attitudes toward gender-inclusive/exclusive language

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

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

The impact of maleness on judicial decision making: masculinity, chivalry, and immigration appeals

How expert witnesses' counterfactuals influence causal and responsibility attributions of mock jurors and expert judges

When a Battered Victim Kills Their Abuser: The Impact of Child and Expert Testimony on Mock Jurors' Decision-Making

Gender bias in teaching evaluations: the causal role of department gender composition

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