Mock Jurors' Perceptions of Experts: Examining the Interaction Between Expert Sex and Gendered Nature of Crime on Expert Credibility and Defendant Culpability

Although expert psychological testimony it is not present in every trial, it has the potential to greatly influence the outcome of trials when it is used. As such, it is important to understand factors that influence how jurors receive psychological testimony. Yet before expert testimony is presented, an attorney must hire the expert. This process of selection requires further scrutiny, as it is possible that persuasive and qualified experts never make it before a jury. Gender is a factor that has the potential to bias both jurors and attorneys despite being unrelated to expert qualifications. This study examined whether expert sex impacts juror and lawyer perceptions of expert credibility, as well as whether this perceived credibility is impacted by the gendered nature of the crime in question. It was hypothesized that lawyers who found experts more credible, or believe the jury will perceive them as more credible, would be more likely to use them. It was further presumed that jurors who believe an expert to be more credible might be more persuaded by the expert’s testimony. Results indicated that the most salient characteristic presented in the case vignettes was neither the expert sex nor the gender of the defendant, but rather the circumstances of the crime committed. There was some indication the gendered nature of the crime interacted with the gender of the defendant to influence expert credibility, but this effect was independent of the expert’s sex.M.S., Psychology -- Drexel University, 201