Citation

How Race, Gender, and Emotion Expression Affect Holdout Jurors’ Influence during Jury Deliberation

Abstract | Word Stems | Keywords | Association | Citation | Similar Titles



Abstract:

Being forced to deliberate at length because one group member disagrees creates hostility (Levine, 1989). Discussions get heated; negative emotion results. Yet, we know little about how holdout jurors’ emotion expression might influence their ability to exert influence over the majority—particularly if they belong to a historically disadvantaged group for whom emotion stereotypes exist (e.g., Black men as angry, Hugenberg & Bodenhausen, 2003). Expressing emotion could detract or enhance credibility, depending on the holdout’s social group. Two mock jury studies investigate how holdout jurors’ emotion expression affects their potential to influence the majority—particularly for stereotyped holdouts.

In a deception mock jury paradigm, participants were told that they were engaged in a computer-mediated discussion with five other mock jurors about a murder case, when in reality they were reading a pre-written fictional deliberation script. After reporting their initial verdict preference, all participants saw the same false pre-determined feedback in which one holdout juror always argued for the verdict opposite of the participant’s original verdict choice (all of the other jurors always agreed with the participant). Participants reported confidence in their verdict throughout deliberation. We manipulated whether the holdout expressed no emotion, anger, or fear (Studies 1 and 2), and the holdout’s group membership: men versus women (Study 1), and White versus Black (Study 2).

In Study 1, the effect of expressing emotion on the holdout’s ability to influence the majority depended on the holdout’s gender. When holdouts expressed no emotion or fear, the participants’ confidence in their original verdict was unaffected. After a man holdout expressed anger, however, participants began to doubt their original opinion more (i.e., the holdout exerted minority influence); whereas after a woman expressed anger, participants became more confident in their original opinion. Thus, men holdouts gained influence by expressing anger, but women were penalized for expressing anger. Women might be penalized because they are violating a stereotype by expressing anger, or because a historically disadvantaged group is expressing a dominant emotion (i.e., anger). We tested these explanations by investigating whether the effect replicated for another historically disadvantaged group for whom expressing anger would not violate a stereotype: Black men.
In Study 2, we again found that men gained influence over the majority by expressing anger, but in contrast to the gender effect in Study 2, this effect did not depend on race. After men holdouts expressed anger—regardless of whether they were Black or White—participants’ doubt in their original opinion decreased.

Together, these studies reveal that expressing anger can greatly affect holdout jurors’ chances of influencing the majority—this effect depends, however, on the holdout’s social group. Although men were able to gain influence by expressing anger, women were penalized. Yet, not all historically disadvantaged groups are penalized—Black men also gained influence by expressing anger. We will discuss the implications and potential psychological explanations for why some historically disadvantaged groups are penalized for expressing anger and others are not, including the role of emotion stereotypes and power in intergroup dynamics.
Convention
Convention is an application service for managing large or small academic conferences, annual meetings, and other types of events!
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

Association:
Name: The Law and Society Association
URL:
http://www.lawandsociety.org


Citation:
URL: http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p644604_index.html
Direct Link:
HTML Code:

MLA Citation:

Salerno, Jessica. "How Race, Gender, and Emotion Expression Affect Holdout Jurors’ Influence during Jury Deliberation" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the The Law and Society Association, Sheraton Boston Hotel, Boston, MA, May 30, 2013 <Not Available>. 2014-12-11 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p644604_index.html>

APA Citation:

Salerno, J. M. , 2013-05-30 "How Race, Gender, and Emotion Expression Affect Holdout Jurors’ Influence during Jury Deliberation" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the The Law and Society Association, Sheraton Boston Hotel, Boston, MA <Not Available>. 2014-12-11 from http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p644604_index.html

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: Being forced to deliberate at length because one group member disagrees creates hostility (Levine, 1989). Discussions get heated; negative emotion results. Yet, we know little about how holdout jurors’ emotion expression might influence their ability to exert influence over the majority—particularly if they belong to a historically disadvantaged group for whom emotion stereotypes exist (e.g., Black men as angry, Hugenberg & Bodenhausen, 2003). Expressing emotion could detract or enhance credibility, depending on the holdout’s social group. Two mock jury studies investigate how holdout jurors’ emotion expression affects their potential to influence the majority—particularly for stereotyped holdouts.

In a deception mock jury paradigm, participants were told that they were engaged in a computer-mediated discussion with five other mock jurors about a murder case, when in reality they were reading a pre-written fictional deliberation script. After reporting their initial verdict preference, all participants saw the same false pre-determined feedback in which one holdout juror always argued for the verdict opposite of the participant’s original verdict choice (all of the other jurors always agreed with the participant). Participants reported confidence in their verdict throughout deliberation. We manipulated whether the holdout expressed no emotion, anger, or fear (Studies 1 and 2), and the holdout’s group membership: men versus women (Study 1), and White versus Black (Study 2).

In Study 1, the effect of expressing emotion on the holdout’s ability to influence the majority depended on the holdout’s gender. When holdouts expressed no emotion or fear, the participants’ confidence in their original verdict was unaffected. After a man holdout expressed anger, however, participants began to doubt their original opinion more (i.e., the holdout exerted minority influence); whereas after a woman expressed anger, participants became more confident in their original opinion. Thus, men holdouts gained influence by expressing anger, but women were penalized for expressing anger. Women might be penalized because they are violating a stereotype by expressing anger, or because a historically disadvantaged group is expressing a dominant emotion (i.e., anger). We tested these explanations by investigating whether the effect replicated for another historically disadvantaged group for whom expressing anger would not violate a stereotype: Black men.
In Study 2, we again found that men gained influence over the majority by expressing anger, but in contrast to the gender effect in Study 2, this effect did not depend on race. After men holdouts expressed anger—regardless of whether they were Black or White—participants’ doubt in their original opinion decreased.

Together, these studies reveal that expressing anger can greatly affect holdout jurors’ chances of influencing the majority—this effect depends, however, on the holdout’s social group. Although men were able to gain influence by expressing anger, women were penalized. Yet, not all historically disadvantaged groups are penalized—Black men also gained influence by expressing anger. We will discuss the implications and potential psychological explanations for why some historically disadvantaged groups are penalized for expressing anger and others are not, including the role of emotion stereotypes and power in intergroup dynamics.


Similar Titles:
The influence of juror gender, defendant race, and victim attractiveness on juror decision making in a sexual assault trial

Understanding the Influence of Victim Gender in Death Penatly Cases: The Importance of Victim Race, Sex-related Victimization, and Jury Decision-making

Emotion and Jury Deliberation: Does Expressing Emotion Make Stereotyped Holdout Jurors More or Less Persuasive?


 
All Academic, Inc. is your premier source for research and conference management. Visit our website, www.allacademic.com, to see how we can help you today.