๐”– Bobbio Scriptorium
โœฆ   LIBER   โœฆ

The Effect of Strong Versus Weak Evidence on the Assessment of Race Stereotypic and Race Nonstereotypic Crimes

โœ Scribed by Randall A. Gordon

Book ID
109289461
Publisher
John Wiley and Sons
Year
1993
Tongue
English
Weight
798 KB
Volume
23
Category
Article
ISSN
0021-9029

No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.

โœฆ Synopsis

The effects of defendant race, type of crime, and strength of evidence on the perception and evaluation of criminal offenses were examined. Consistent with past research, defendants accused of race stereotypic crimes were more likely to be perceived as guilty and as more typical offenders than were defendants accused of race nonstereotypic crimes. The strength of evidence supplied to subjects did moderate the interaction between defendant race and type of crime on some of the punishment items. These findings and their implications for future related research are discussed.

๐Ÿ“œ SIMILAR VOLUMES

The effects of defendant race, victim ra
The effects of defendant race, victim race, and juror gender on evidence processing in a murder trial
โœ Robert ForsterLee; Lynne ForsterLee; Irwin A. Horowitz; Ellen King ๐Ÿ“‚ Article ๐Ÿ“… 2006 ๐Ÿ› John Wiley and Sons ๐ŸŒ English โš– 129 KB ๐Ÿ‘ 2 views

## Abstract The effects of defendant race, victim race, and juror gender on sentencing and information processing were examined within the context of a murder trial. A sample consisting of 96, jury eligible White Australians read one of four versions of a real trial transcript, in which the race of

When stereotype-based expectancies impai
When stereotype-based expectancies impair performance: the effect of prejudice, race, and target quality on judgments and perceiver performance
โœ Theresa K. Vescio; Monica Biernat ๐Ÿ“‚ Article ๐Ÿ“… 1999 ๐Ÿ› John Wiley and Sons ๐ŸŒ English โš– 121 KB ๐Ÿ‘ 2 views

High-and low-prejudiced participants were presented with a lecture segment in which the race of the professor (White or Black) and lecture quality (high or low) were manipulated. Consistent with predictions, low-prejudiced participants were more extreme in their evaluations (more negative) and perfo