Paper 3 - Criminal 4 -accents in the courtroom

Question 1

what is the halo effect

Answer 1

a cognitive bias in which an observer’s overall impression of a person influences their feelings and thoughts about the person’s character.

Question 2

Describe the background study by Rozell on child witnesses

Answer 2

• courts traditionally excluded child witnesses by reasoning that they do not have the capability to tell the truth about an event.
• Rozell found the, to be good observers and more objective than adults.
• he suggested that in crimes such as child abuse children can be reliable witnesses in identifying perpetrators as they are often a family member or friend.
• however Children find it more difficult to recall the chronology of events
• their recollection can be distorted by leading questions

Question 3

Describe the background study done by Castellow on attractiveness of defendents/victims

Answer 3

• They used a mock trial with 71 male and 74 female psychology students from east carolina university. Pps were tolf that they would be reading a sexual harassement case and would have to answer questions on it.
• Photographs were also provided, which had previously been rated on an attractive/ unattractive likert scale. Pps had to respond to a question of do you think Mr Radford is guilty of sexual harassemen.
• When the defendent was attractive guilt vericts were found 56% of the time compared to 76% for an unattractive defendent.
• When the victim was attractive the verdict was guilty 77% of the time compared to 55% with an unattractive victim.
• They concluded that appearance can have a powerful affect on jurors and a defendent/victim might be adivsed to make the best of their appearance when in court.

Question 4

Describe the background study by Penrod and Cutler on witness confidence

Answer 4

• Mock trial
• american Pps acted as jurors and were shown a videotaped trial of robbery in which eyewitness identification played a key role.
• The pps were randomly allocated to a 80% or 100% confident condition
• When the witness was 80% confident the guilty rate fell to 60%
• When the witness was 100% confident, 67% said the suspect was guilty.

Question 5

what is the aim of Dixon’s research on accents and guilt

Answer 5

• To test the hypothesis that a suspect with a brummie accent would recieve a higher rating of guilt than a suspect with a standrd accent.
• Also to see if race and type of crime effects how the suspect was judged

Question 6

what was the method of Dixon’s study

Answer 6

• lab experiment
• independent measures design
• iv= brummie or standard accent, race, crime type (armed robbery or cheque fraud)
• dv= attributions of guilt using a 7 point rating scale.

Question 7

what was the sample of Dixon’s study

Answer 7

• pps were students from the psych departement at university college worcester.
• It was part of their course requirement to take part.
• 119 white undergraduates, 24 male, 95 female.

Question 8

what was the procedure of Dixon’s study

Answer 8

1. pps listened to a 2 min tape recording of a mock interview. The interview was standardised exchange between a police officer and a suspect who had either a standard accent or a Brummie accent, both played by the same man who was pleading guilty
2. one tape he was accused of white collar cheque fraud and another he was accused of blue collar armed robbery.
3. the description of the suspect was either black or white
4. pps rated the suspecs guilt on a 7 point rating scale ranging from innocent to guilty.

Question 9

what were the results of Dixon’s study for accent type

Answer 9

• The suspect with the brummie accent was rated 4.27/7
• the suspect with the standard accent was rated 3.65/7.
• black suspects had higher guiltly verdicts
• blue collar workers had higher guilty verdicts

Question 10

what are the conclusions for Dixon’s study

Answer 10

• a range of social psychological factors can influence perception of a suspects guilt including accent, race and crime type.
• Nonstandard english speakers tend to be perceived as more guilty than standard speakers
• for example it may be that non standard speakers are perceived as guiltier because it suggests they are working class causing a stereotype that they are more likely to be a criminal
• also language is seen as less competent so they may seem less assured which can relate to lying

Question 11

evaluate the validity of this topic

Answer 11

1. Castellow - ecological validity of research using mock trials is low as it does not represent the real courtroom.However internal validity is high because a high level of control is possible.
2. Dixon - high internal validity due to high control in a lab, but low ecological validity.
3. Dixon - low population validity as he used psychology students so it cannot be generalised to other people, also, more females than males.

Question 12

evaluate the reliability of this topic

Answer 12

1. Dixon - low external reliability as cannot be generalised for other accents and countries.
2. Castellow - standardised photographs and and questions.
3. penrod and cutler - standardised mock trials, videotaped trials, 80% or 100% confidence.

Question 13

evaluate the sampling bias of this topic

Answer 13

1.sample used by Dixon consists of psychology undergraduates and we might question the representativeness of this. people other than students may view accents differently.
2. castellow - Americans
3.rozell - used children

Question 14

evaluate the ethnocentrism of this topic

Answer 14

1. Dixon adopts a western perspective of accents and class that may be different to non western views.
2. Castellow’s research is relying on western perceptions of attractiveness which may differ.
3. penrod and cutler used american pps, different areas may have different views on confidence

Question 15

how does this topic relate to the freewill/ determinism debate

Answer 15

1. Dixon -the decision jurors make is determined by social factors such as the accent of the defendant.
2. Rozell - age is a biological factor - biological determinism
3. Castellow - people who chose to not give the unattractive suspect a guilty verdict shows freewill

Question 16

how does this topic relate to the individual/situational debate

Answer 16

1. Dixon - situation of accent of people in the court room environment
2. Rozell - individual - age is a biological stage
3. Castellow - situation of person’s attractiveness

Question 17

evaluate the usefulness of research in this topic

Answer 17

1. Dixon - it is useful for juries and judges to be aware that accent can impact jurors’ perceptions of guilt. this can lead to jurors being from the same area of the suspect
2. Castellow - can be used to give advice to witnesses to be dressed smartly and look their best, but low ecological validity
3. Rozell - shows us that children can be reliable witnesses in court, this can help many court cases that require children to give an eyewitness testimony

Question 18

evaluate ethical considerations in this topic

Answer 18

1. in Dixon’s study pps were required to take part as part of their course, therefore some pps may have felt unable to withdraw from the study.
2. Dixon - some pps may have felt distressed when listening to the taped interviews.
3. Rozell - children no informed consent

Question 19

evaluate socially sensitive research in this topic

Answer 19

1. weakness - leads to labelling - Brummie people may be discriminated against in a legal context,
2. strength - allows for the study of specific behaviour - castellow.
3. weakness - Rozell - findings show that children are more suseptible to leading questions and confusion of chronology of events, lawyers may use this against children in the court room when testifying

Question 20

evaluate psychology as a sciene in this topic

Answer 20

1. Dixon - lacks ecological validity
2. Castellow - unrepresentitive sample, ethnocentric
3. Dixon - high internal validity

Question 21

evaluate reductionism/holism this topic

Answer 21

1. Dixon - holist, class, race and accent
2. Castellow - reductionism, only looking at attractiveness
3. Penrod and Cutler - only looking at confidence

Question 22

what are the 2 applications of topic 4

Answer 22

present evidence in order
using expert witnesses

Question 23

what is presenting evidence in order ?

Answer 23

• Presenting evidence in a coherant chronological order.
• the lawyer creates a timeline by organising the evidence into a story order so jurors can use this to enchance memory of the events of the crime.
• jurors actively make sense of the information and attempt to make their own story based on their knowledge of the events.Jurors will hear different stories from several people, but will accept the story that covers the most amount of detail
• at the end of the trial the judge sums up the evidence and advvices the jury on how to come to a verdict
• Jurors will match the story they believe with a verdict decision.

Question 24

what is the usefulness, effectivness and practicalities of of story order

Answer 24

• usefulness - create a timeline is useful for lawyers as it provides them with a strategy to influence decision making of jurors to benefit their client.
• effectiveness - more persusasive strategy than witness order. However if both sides use a story order, any other advanatges that one side has may reduce this effect
• practicalities - counsel and their legal team need to make sure they collect and catagorise all evidence so it can be presented in the most effective story order to influence decision making of jurors

Question 25

what is using expert witness

Answer 25

* expert testimony is used when there is a particular scientific, technical or specialised area that needs to be explained in court. This is provided by a qualified expert. * An expert witness should have a detailed knowledge of the subject matter, often lawyers will cross examine experts in a great detail and they should have powers of analytical reasoning and be able to think on their feet in case of fresh evidence or counter arguements * They should be able to communicate confidently and coherantly

Question 26

what is the usefulness, effectiveness and practicalities of expert witnesses

Answer 26

* usefulness - it allows for speciaist information to be clearly explained so it can be understoof by the jurors to help them reach a verdict * effectivness - provides an effective safegaurd against jurors' over-reliance on witness confidence in presenting their evidence. * practicalities - in large or complex cases the court may allow both the defense and prosecution to have an expert.