An aversive racism explanation for the influence of race, SES, and race-stereotypical crimes on jury decision biases against East Asian American defendants

Aversive racism, a subtle form of contemporary racism for persons who may hold egalitarian values, has been used to explain prejudice by jurors toward Black American and Latinx American defendants, but has yet to examine East Asian American defendants as targets of prejudice. After conducting a pilo...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Authors: Phan, Diana K. (Author) ; Espinoza, Russ K. E. (Author) ; Sy, Susan R. (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Published: 2022
In: Journal of ethnicity in criminal justice
Year: 2022, Volume: 20, Issue: 1, Pages: 73-95
Online Access: Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Keywords:
Prejudice
Asian-American
aversive racism
Juror decision-making
Description
Summary:Aversive racism, a subtle form of contemporary racism for persons who may hold egalitarian values, has been used to explain prejudice by jurors toward Black American and Latinx American defendants, but has yet to examine East Asian American defendants as targets of prejudice. After conducting a pilot study to find race-stereotypical crimes for Asian Americans and White Americans, the purpose of the main study was to examine mock jurors’ prejudice toward East Asian American defendants from an aversive racism perspective. A 2 (Race: White American or East Asian American) x 2 (SES: low or high) x 2 (Race-Stereotypical Crime: embezzlement or computer hacking) between-subjects design was conducted. Participants were randomly assigned to read one of eight trial vignettes describing the crime the defendant had allegedly committed. They were then asked to render a verdict, recommend a sentence, and rate the defendant on various culpability and trait measures. Results showed mock jurors sentenced the low SES East Asian American defendant who committed a race-stereotypical crime more punitively than all other conditions. Mock jurors also found this defendant more culpable and rated him more negatively on a number of trait ascriptions. Limitations and future directions are discussed.
ISSN:1537-7946
DOI:10.1080/15377938.2022.2054890