RT Article
T1 The effects of religion and stereotype content on verdicts and sentence severity when defending terror charges
JF Applied psychology in criminal justice
VO 14
IS 1
SP 37
OP 54
A1 Frings, Daniel
A1 Rice, Kirsty
A1 Albery, I.
A2 Rice, Kirsty
A2 Albery, I.
LA English
YR 2018
UL https://krimdok.uni-tuebingen.de/Record/191930424X
AB School of Applied Sciences, Division of Psychology, London South Bank University Little evidence exists to test if a defendant's religion affects their verdict outcome or sentencing. The current study addresses this question and also tests the role of stereotype content as an explanatory variable. Participants (n=141) were presented with crimes which were either stereotypical of Muslims or not. Participants viewed details of a case resulting in either a terror or a theft charge, with a Muslim, Christian or Atheist suspect. Both being a Muslim and defending terror crimes led to more frequent guilty verdicts and more severesentences. Muslims were perceived as more cold and competent. The colder and more competent suspects were perceived, the more likely they were to be found guilty and the more severe the sentence. Warm/cold evaluations mediated the effect of religion. These findings suggest that Muslim terror defendants may be affected by systematic bias in trials and that this may be driven by the stereotypes content.
NO Literaturverzeichnis: Seite 52-54
K1 Jury
K1 Muslim
K1 Religion
K1 Stereotypes
K1 Terrorism