English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Perceptions of a defendant’s psychopathic personality traits can impact mock jurors’ decision making, yet findings on the relationship of jurors’ and defendants’ gender on legal decision making have been inconsistent. This study investigates the relationship between defendant prototypical gender-congruent or -incongruent psychopathic traits and mock jurors’ perception and sentencing recommendations. In a between-subject design, participants ( N  = 1,721) rendered a verdict and rated the extent to which they perceived the defendant as legally responsible, morally responsible, and their recidivism risk. Participants prescribed harsher punishments and held more negative perceptions of a defendant with psychopathic traits than a defendant without these traits. However, the defendant received similar punishment and was judged equally negatively in both gender-congruent and -incongruent conditions. Finally, while men were more likely to choose the death verdict, women held more negative views of the defendant. Thus, portrayal of psychopathic traits seems related to harsher sentencing independent of gender-specific trait variations.

Defendant psychopathic traits, but not defendant gender, predict death penalty verdicts in mock-juror decision making