Dangerous Decisions: Influence of Juror Attitudes and Defendant Appearance on Legal Decision-Making

According to the dangerous decisions theory (Porter, S., & ten Brinke, L. (2009). Dangerous decisions: A theoretical framework for understanding how judges assess credibility in the courtroom. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 14(1), 119–134), intuitive evaluations of facial trustworthiness influence the interpretation of evidence presented in courtroom settings. This study examined the role of individual differences in this process. Participants were presented with crime narratives, accompanied by a photograph of the supposed defendant that was previously rated as highly trustworthy or untrustworthy. Following presentation of the evidence in each case, participants rated the defendant's culpability and then completed questionnaires assessing potential biases. Participants endorsing justice–fairness were more likely to exonerate an untrustworthy-looking defendant, but less likely to exonerate a trustworthy-looking one. Individuals who held a strong racial bias, by contrast, were less likely to be influenced by exonerating evidence, specifically for untrustworthy-looking defendants. These results suggest that faces varying in trustworthiness activate particular biases, and a tunnel vision approach to decision-making that may lead to wrongful convictions in a legal setting.