Meta-analytic results hold across study, sample, and test levels

Evidence

The first metaanalysis to aggregate studies examining the impact of racial bias primarily examined White jurors’ judgments of Black (vs. White) defendants. Sweeney and Haney (1992) found a small but significant bias against Black defendants. A follow-up meta-analysis did not find evidence that minorities suffered more adverse outcomes compared with White defendants in mock juror simulations (Mazzella & Feingold, 1994). The researchers in the second meta-analysis, however, did not code for the race of the participants, so it is possible that the lack of bias was due to the inclusion of minority mock jurors, who may be less likely to express bias against their own group. — Joseph Avery, Jim Sidanius, Joel Cooper, Gregory Davis, Amanda N., Bias in the Law, 848 (#complicates, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: A focal definition enables replication and comparison across studies. — Erik Bleich, What Is Islamophobia and How Much Is…, 71; Converging multiple research methods strengthens confidence in a finding; Meta-analysis pools all studies to estimate effect sizes and moderators — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 1677 (+3 more)

Broader Connections

• Meta-analytic findings on juror racial bias are mixed and depend on participant coding #complicates (0.74) — Joseph Avery, Jim Sidanius, Joel Cooper, Gregory Davis, Amanda N., Bias in the Law, 848