The effect of mock jury deliberation on the influence of stereotypes about sexual assault
Year: 2026
Type: article
Abstract: Research on individual (mock) jurors suggests that socially shared inaccurate stereotypes and misperceptions about sexual assault influence perceptions of the credibility of complainants and the likelihood that the defendant is guilty. However, juries, not individuals, return verdicts in jury trials for sexual assault, and there is very limited evidence about whether the influence of stereotypes and misperceptions about sexual assault persists during deliberation. Research more generally suggests that group deliberation can promote more thorough consideration of the evidence or, conversely, focus the group on seeking consensus around socially shared information such as stereotypes. Mock jurors ( N = 103) watched a video of a fictional trial where the complainant gave evidence which included whether she responded in ways that were consistent or inconsistent with stereotypical complainant behaviour and whether the perpetrator acted in ways consistent or inconconsistent with stereotypical sexual assault. Participants then deliberated in juries ( N = 10) with the goal of reaching a unanimous verdict. A mixed-effects analysis found that the effect of case stereotypicality increased after deliberation, indicating that deliberation did not mitigate the negative effect of stereotypes on perceptions of complainants as reflected in discussions which focused largely on inaccurate stereotypes. These results suggest that juries may benefit from interventions that assist them to rely less on inaccurate stereotypes in sexual assault cases.
Source: Journal of Criminal Justice
Language: English
Subfield: Law
Field: Social Sciences
Domain: Social Sciences
Open Access status: hybrid
Estimated APC paid: $3,930
Funder: Australian Research Council
OpenAlex ID: W7142315620