The Effects of Confession Evidence and Defendant Race on Juror Perceptions
ORCID: 0009-0003-0608-4428
Abstract
Confession evidence continues to be one of the most persuasive, incriminating forms of evidence presented during a criminal trial (Kassin & Gudjonsson, 2004; Leo, 2009). Research suggests that jurors may also be influenced by extra-legal factors, such as personal characteristics of the defendant (e.g., the defendant’s race; D.J. Devine & Caughlin, 2014; Pickel et al., 2013; Sommers & Ellsworth, 2000). Research investigating the effect of race on juror perceptions has yielded mixed results. Some research has found that White jurors discriminate against defendants belonging to a racial minority while other research identifies a phenomenon referred to as the watchdog hypothesis (Mitchell et al., 2005; Pickel et al., 2013; Sargent & Bradfield, 2004; Sommers, 2006). The watchdog hypothesis posits that White jurors will be more attentive to legally relevant information when the defendant is Black in an attempt to serve as “watchdogs” (Petty et al., 1999, p. 26) against racism (Ewanation & Maeder, 2021; Sargent & Bradfield, 2004). This quantitative study examined the intersection of defendant race and strength of confession evidence with mock jurors’ perceptions of both defendant guilt and voluntariness of confession in a hypothetical case where the defendant had recanted their confession. All analyses showed an impact of voluntariness of confession, but not race of the defendant, among participants in this study. Further, no interaction between defendant race and strength of confession evidence was found to be related to participants’ perceptions of defendant guilt or confession voluntariness.This dissertation is available in open access at AURA (https://aura.antioch.edu) and OhioLINK ETD Center (https://etd.ohiolink.edu).