Does Insanity Have a Face? An Examination of Defendant Appearance and Juror Attitudes that Affect Juror Decisions in Insanity Defense Cases.

摘要

The purpose of this study was to examine how a defendant's physical appearance impacts jurors' judgments in insanity defense cases. Further, the study was conducted to gain a better understanding of how attitudes and misconceptions regarding the insanity defense affect jurors' decisions. Defendant appearance was manipulated utilizing the following categories: race (African-American and Caucasian), facial maturity (baby-faced and mature-faced), and hygiene (disheveled and non-disheveled). Participants (N = 418) were randomly assigned to one of eight conditions, determined by the three independent variables. All participants viewed an image (computer generated) of a defendant while reading a case vignette, casted their vote (Guilty or Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity), and answered a series of questions about the insanity defense. It was hypothesized, first, that mature-faced defendants would receive more NGRI votes as well as a higher likelihood rating for finding the defendant NGRI than would baby-faced defendants. Second, it was predicted that Caucasian defendants would receive more NGRI votes and higher likelihood ratings than would African-American defendants. Lastly, it was hypothesized that there would be a significant difference in likelihood ratings and NGRI votes between disheveled and non-disheveled defendants. Results indicated that the defendant with a non-disheveled, baby-faced appearance received significantly higher NGRI ratings than did the defendant with a non-disheveled, mature-faced appearance. Additionally, subjects who had a negative view of the insanity defense (high IDA-R scores) were significantly more likely to cast a vote of Guilty.