Self-presentation concerns mask the link between prejudice and juror bias

Evidence

Concerns about appearing egalitarian, however, may interfere with the ability to detect a relationship between levels of prejudice and expression of racial bias (e.g., Sommers & Ellsworth, 2000; 2001). Yet the watchdog effect suggests that a more thorough evaluation of evidence for a stigmatized target only occurs for low prejudice individuals (Fleming et al., 2005). — Joseph Avery, Jim Sidanius, Joel Cooper, Gregory Davis, Amanda N., Bias in the Law, 876

Categorization

Category: Causal Relationships

Related

• Egalitarian self-presentation conceals the true relationship between prejudice and bias (similarity 0.86)
• Prejudice awareness makes jurors evaluate evidence more thoroughly (similarity 0.84)
• Raising awareness of bias risk can either reduce discrimination or sharpen scrutiny of evidence (similarity 0.81)
• Making race salient in a trial reduces jurors’ racial bias (similarity 0.81)
• Failing to code mock-juror race can mask racial bias findings (similarity 0.80)
• People easily generate race-neutral justifications for decisions actually driven by race (similarity 0.80)
• Sincere fairness goals do not prevent race-based misjudgment in prosecutors (similarity 0.80)
• Meta-analytic findings on juror racial bias are mixed and depend on participant coding (similarity 0.79)
• Racial bias and out-group bias are distinct juror phenomena (similarity 0.79)
• Sincere egalitarian conviction coexists with unconscious bias that surfaces only in ambiguous decisions (similarity 0.78)
• Race-neutral justifications for peremptory strikes shield implicit bias from Batson review (similarity 0.78)
• Individual juror bias studies may not predict deliberating jury verdicts (similarity 0.78)
• Implicit bias alone insufficiently explains racial inequity in criminal justice outcomes (similarity 0.78)