The influence of suspect ethnicity and evidence direction on alibi credibility assessment

Summary We investigated whether evidence direction (incriminating versus exonerating) moderated the influence of intergroup bias on alibi credibility assessments. Israeli‐Jewish participants (n = 160) assessed the credibility of an alibi statement provided by either an Israeli‐Jewish or an Israeli‐A...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Applied cognitive psychology 2020-11, Vol.34 (6), p.1516-1521
Hauptverfasser: Rozmann, Nir, Nahari, Galit
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Summary We investigated whether evidence direction (incriminating versus exonerating) moderated the influence of intergroup bias on alibi credibility assessments. Israeli‐Jewish participants (n = 160) assessed the credibility of an alibi statement provided by either an Israeli‐Jewish or an Israeli‐Arab suspect. Along with the alibi statement, half of the participants were presented with incriminating evidence, while the other half were presented with exonerating evidence. The results indicated that evidence direction influenced credibility assessment regarding both in‐group and out‐group suspects. Specifically, under incriminating evidence, Israeli‐Jewish suspects were perceived as more deceptive than Israeli‐Arab suspects, whereas under exonerating evidence, no such differences were found. These results emphasize the significance of group bias in assessing the credibility of alibi statements.
ISSN:0888-4080
1099-0720
DOI:10.1002/acp.3715