Download
1 / 8
80 likes | 221 Vues
This study examines how the physical attractiveness of male employees and female employers impacts jury verdicts in sexual harassment cases. Conducted with 324 undergraduate psychology students, the research explores the effects of juror gender and litigant attractiveness on verdict outcomes. Results indicate that guilty verdicts are more prevalent when the defendant is unattractive and the plaintiff is attractive, especially among female jurors. The findings highlight significant biases influenced by physical appearance and gender dynamics in legal judgments.
E N D
Effects of Physical Attractiveness on Evaluations of a Male Employee’s Allegation of Sexual Harassment by His Female EmployerBy Karl L. Wuensch & Charles H. Moore
Research Question & Hypothesis Research Question What effects of the sex of the juror and the physical attractiveness of the litigants where sexual harassment of a male employee by his female employer is occurring have on the outcome, or verdict? Hypothesis Guilty verdicts would be more likely when the defendant (female employer) was unattractive and when the plaintiff (male employee) was attractive.
Participants 324 total subjects • 164 men • 160 women All were enrolled in the undergraduate psychology classes at a southern college. Statistics 78% Caucasian 19% African American 3.5% Other (Native American, Asian American, Hispanic)
Procedures • Put into 10 groups of 40 individuals in each 2. Each was given a packet 3. Plaintiff gave his testimony 4. Defendant gave her testimony and denied all allegations • Given participant response forms • Asked to rate, on a 9-point scale certainty of guilt and the attractiveness of each litigant. 7. Jury asked for guilty or not guilty verdict
Variables of the Study • Independent Variables • Sex of the participants • Male or female • Physical attractiveness of plaintiff • Physical attractiveness of defendant • 1=physically unattractive to 9=physically attractive • Dependent Variables • The verdict • guilty or not guilty • Participants own certainty of guilt or lack there of • 9-point scale from “definitely not guilty” to “definitely guilty”
The Set-Up defendant plaintiff defendant plaintiff defendant plaintiff unattractive unattractive attractive attractive unattractive attractive 58% guilty verdicts 78% guilty verdicts 85% guilty verdicts
Results • Female jurors rendered a guilty verdict more often than males did • Females: 74% Males: 66& • When defendant was attractive and plaintiff not, female jurors gave out more verdicts (78%) compared to men (56%) • Plaintiff was attractive and defendant was not, female jurors were more likely to render a guilty verdict (85%) compared to men (68%) • Both unattractive, results were not very much different. (females 58%, males 63%) • Both attractive, no difference at all (78%) • “Only significant effect was that of the plaintiff attractiveness. With certainty of guilty being significantly greater when the plaintiff was attractive”
Limitations • Limitation 1 • College students and actual jury selection • Limitation 2 • Verdict of this study compared to that of an actual trial • Limitation 3 • Predeliberation verdicts
