Year: 2025
Type: article
Abstract: In the United States, courts say a jury must determine whether a defendant is an Indian subject to federal jurisdiction; however, jurors are provided little guidance regarding what to consider in their Indian status determinations. Given the jurisdictional and legal defense implications Indian status decisions have, we tested whether jurors consider two easily accessible potential indicators of Indian race: appearance and name. We examined whether mock jurors’ (N = 825) stereotypes of Indians influenced their determinations of whether a defendant is an Indian and whether that defendant is guilty of the crime alleged using a fully crossed 3 (defendant photo Indian stereotypicality: high, low, and none) × 3 (defendant name Indian stereotypicality: high, low, and none) between-participants design, controlling for participants’ feelings toward Indians as a group and internal and external motivations to respond without prejudice. In general, neither the defendant’s name nor photo stereotypicality predicted Indian status determinations, but jurors who thought the defendant was an Indian were more likely to find the defendant guilty. Thus, mock jurors consider factors other than the defendant’s name and appearance when deciding whether the defendant is Indian, but if the defendant is considered Indian, mock jurors are more likely to find the defendant guilty.
Source: Behavioral Sciences
DOI: 10.3390/bs15060824
Authors: Kimberly Schweitzer, Dan Lewerenz
Institution: University of North Dakota
Language: English
Subfield: Law
Field: Social Sciences
Domain: Social Sciences
Open Access status: gold
Estimated APC paid: $2,654
Funder: University of North Dakota
OpenAlex ID: W4411338558