The effect of defendant gender on juror decision-making

Research investigating the role of stereotypes in jury decision-making has typically considered stereotypes as acting as peripheral cues in determin ing the credibility of experts or likelihood of guilt of defendants — with counter-stereotypic courtroom participants faring less well. The present study investigated the possibility that the extent to which courtroom participants are stereotypic can alter the mode of information processing. Students (N = 78) read a transcript of a case in which either a male or female allegedly committed an armed robbery. As predicted, the female counter-stereotypic defendant was distracting and effortful processing only occurred when the defendant was male. The male was seen as more guilty and the prosecution's case was more convincing when the prosecution had a strong, but not weak, case. There were no effects of case strength for the female defendant. Results are discussed in terms of the role of stereotypes in the jury decision-making.