Premium
Aversive racism in Britain: the use of inadmissible evidence in legal decisions
Author(s) -
Hodson Gordon,
Hooper Hugh,
Dovidio John F.,
Gaertner Samuel L.
Publication year - 2005
Publication title -
european journal of social psychology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.609
H-Index - 111
eISSN - 1099-0992
pISSN - 0046-2772
DOI - 10.1002/ejsp.261
Subject(s) - prejudice (legal term) , racism , white (mutation) , psychology , social psychology , race (biology) , racial bias , criminology , law , sociology , political science , gender studies , biochemistry , chemistry , gene
The aversive racism framework (S. L. Gaertner & J. F. Dovidio, 1986) suggests that bias against Blacks is most likely to be expressed by Whites when it can be explained or justified along non‐racial grounds. The present experiment adopted a 2 (Evidence: admissible vs. inadmissible) × 2 (Defendant Race: White vs. Black) between subjects design, asking White participants, whose self‐reported prejudice was assessed, to judge a legal case. As predicted, increased guilt ratings and longer sentencing recommendations were forwarded for the Black (vs. White) defendant only when DNA evidence linking the defendant to the crime had previously been ruled inadmissible. This result was not qualified by self‐report racial attitudes. The implications for evidence inadmissibility in interracial contexts are considered, along with the repercussions of finding experimental evidence of aversive racism outside of North America. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.