The Impact of Prejudice Screening Procedures on Racial Bias in the Courtroom
The current study examines the impact of the challenge for cause procedure and its effectiveness in curbing racial prejudice in trials involving Black defendants. Participants were provided with a trial summary of a defendant charged with either drug trafficking or embezzlement. The race of the defe...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Law and human behavior 2009-08, Vol.33 (4), p.320-328 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 328 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 4 |
| container_start_page | 320 |
| container_title | Law and human behavior |
| container_volume | 33 |
| creator | Schuller, Regina A Kazoleas, Veronica Kawakami, Kerry |
| description | The current study examines the impact of the challenge for cause procedure and its effectiveness in curbing racial prejudice in trials involving Black defendants. Participants were provided with a trial summary of a defendant charged with either drug trafficking or embezzlement. The race of the defendant was either White or Black, with participants in the Black defendant condition receiving (prior to the trial presentation) either no challenge, a close-ended standard challenge, or a modified reflective pretrial questioning strategy. Overall, the results revealed an anti-Black bias in judgments. While the closed ended challenge did little to reduce this bias, the reflective format demonstrated a reduction in racial bias. Theoretical and applied implications of these findings are discussed. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s10979-008-9153-9 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_67463653</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>40540125</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>40540125</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a514t-556c828a1c9af3c4ec1393ad689a29eb22fd37d4aa361547baeab130243925343</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkU2L1EAQhhtR3HH0B3hQgogXiXb1Z_qogx8LA4qu4K3pdCq7GZJ0tjs57L-3hwwuiqynhqrnfbuqXkKeAn0DlOq3CajRpqS0Kg1IXpp7ZANS81Ip-HmfbCgIXWpO9Rl5lNKBUmoqKh-SM6i01ozyDdlfXGFxPkzOz0Voi68RD0vTeSy--4g4duNlrgWPzRIxFWEsvjnfub5437lUdGMxZ_kuLHGOIQyPyYPW9QmfnN4t-fHxw8Xuc7n_8ul8925fOgliLqVUvmKVA29cy71AD9xw16jKOGawZqxtuG6Ec1yBFLp26GrglAlumOSCb8mr1XeK4XrBNNuhSx773o0YlmSVFooryf8Pgs4cMxl88Rd4yEuNeQlrQKiqgupOiFHBqFQGMgQr5GNIKWJrp9gNLt5YoPaYml1Tszk1e0zNHo2fn4yXesDmVnGKKQNsBVJujZcYb3--y_XZKjqkOcTfpoJKQSHfcUter303OTulG-_i3Pkek19ixHG2_VVtObfC8jzDlrz8N_0n9gvSGMUI</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>204205691</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The Impact of Prejudice Screening Procedures on Racial Bias in the Courtroom</title><source>APA PsycARTICLES</source><source>MEDLINE</source><source>HeinOnline Law Journal Library</source><source>Sociological Abstracts</source><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><source>EBSCOhost Business Source Complete</source><creator>Schuller, Regina A ; Kazoleas, Veronica ; Kawakami, Kerry</creator><contributor>Cutler, Brian</contributor><creatorcontrib>Schuller, Regina A ; Kazoleas, Veronica ; Kawakami, Kerry ; Cutler, Brian</creatorcontrib><description>The current study examines the impact of the challenge for cause procedure and its effectiveness in curbing racial prejudice in trials involving Black defendants. Participants were provided with a trial summary of a defendant charged with either drug trafficking or embezzlement. The race of the defendant was either White or Black, with participants in the Black defendant condition receiving (prior to the trial presentation) either no challenge, a close-ended standard challenge, or a modified reflective pretrial questioning strategy. Overall, the results revealed an anti-Black bias in judgments. While the closed ended challenge did little to reduce this bias, the reflective format demonstrated a reduction in racial bias. Theoretical and applied implications of these findings are discussed.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0147-7307</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1573-661X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s10979-008-9153-9</identifier><identifier>PMID: 18777203</identifier><identifier>CODEN: LHBEDM</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Boston: Springer</publisher><subject>Adjudication ; Adolescent ; Attitudes ; Attorneys ; Behavioral Science and Psychology ; Bias ; Black People ; Black White Relations ; Canada ; Challenges for cause ; Community and Environmental Psychology ; Courts ; Criminal defenses ; Criminology and Criminal Justice ; Defendants ; Embezzlement ; Evidence ; Female ; Guilty verdicts ; Human ; Humans ; Interviews as Topic ; Judgment ; Juries ; Jurors ; Law and Psychology ; Male ; Mass Screening - legislation & jurisprudence ; Mass Screening - standards ; Original Article ; Personality and Social Psychology ; Prejudice ; Prejudices ; Psychology ; Race ; Race and Ethnic Discrimination ; Racial Bias ; Racial discrimination ; Racial profiling ; Racial Relations ; Racism ; Self evaluation ; Social psychology ; Studies ; Trials ; Voir dire ; White People ; Young Adult</subject><ispartof>Law and human behavior, 2009-08, Vol.33 (4), p.320-328</ispartof><rights>2009 American Psychology-Law Society/Division 41 of the American Psychological Association</rights><rights>2009 American Psychological Association</rights><rights>Copyright 2009 American Psychology-Law Society / Division 41 of the American Psychological Association</rights><rights>American Psychology-Law Society/Division 41 of the American Psychological Association 2008</rights><rights>American Psychology-Law Society/Division 41 of the American Psychological Association 2009</rights><rights>2008, American Psychology-Law Society/Division 41 of the American Psychological Association</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-a514t-556c828a1c9af3c4ec1393ad689a29eb22fd37d4aa361547baeab130243925343</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-a514t-556c828a1c9af3c4ec1393ad689a29eb22fd37d4aa361547baeab130243925343</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10979-008-9153-9$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10979-008-9153-9$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902,33752,41464,42533,51294</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18777203$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><contributor>Cutler, Brian</contributor><creatorcontrib>Schuller, Regina A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kazoleas, Veronica</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kawakami, Kerry</creatorcontrib><title>The Impact of Prejudice Screening Procedures on Racial Bias in the Courtroom</title><title>Law and human behavior</title><addtitle>Law Hum Behav</addtitle><addtitle>Law Hum Behav</addtitle><description>The current study examines the impact of the challenge for cause procedure and its effectiveness in curbing racial prejudice in trials involving Black defendants. Participants were provided with a trial summary of a defendant charged with either drug trafficking or embezzlement. The race of the defendant was either White or Black, with participants in the Black defendant condition receiving (prior to the trial presentation) either no challenge, a close-ended standard challenge, or a modified reflective pretrial questioning strategy. Overall, the results revealed an anti-Black bias in judgments. While the closed ended challenge did little to reduce this bias, the reflective format demonstrated a reduction in racial bias. Theoretical and applied implications of these findings are discussed.</description><subject>Adjudication</subject><subject>Adolescent</subject><subject>Attitudes</subject><subject>Attorneys</subject><subject>Behavioral Science and Psychology</subject><subject>Bias</subject><subject>Black People</subject><subject>Black White Relations</subject><subject>Canada</subject><subject>Challenges for cause</subject><subject>Community and Environmental Psychology</subject><subject>Courts</subject><subject>Criminal defenses</subject><subject>Criminology and Criminal Justice</subject><subject>Defendants</subject><subject>Embezzlement</subject><subject>Evidence</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Guilty verdicts</subject><subject>Human</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Interviews as Topic</subject><subject>Judgment</subject><subject>Juries</subject><subject>Jurors</subject><subject>Law and Psychology</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Mass Screening - legislation & jurisprudence</subject><subject>Mass Screening - standards</subject><subject>Original Article</subject><subject>Personality and Social Psychology</subject><subject>Prejudice</subject><subject>Prejudices</subject><subject>Psychology</subject><subject>Race</subject><subject>Race and Ethnic Discrimination</subject><subject>Racial Bias</subject><subject>Racial discrimination</subject><subject>Racial profiling</subject><subject>Racial Relations</subject><subject>Racism</subject><subject>Self evaluation</subject><subject>Social psychology</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Trials</subject><subject>Voir dire</subject><subject>White People</subject><subject>Young Adult</subject><issn>0147-7307</issn><issn>1573-661X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2009</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><sourceid>BHHNA</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkU2L1EAQhhtR3HH0B3hQgogXiXb1Z_qogx8LA4qu4K3pdCq7GZJ0tjs57L-3hwwuiqynhqrnfbuqXkKeAn0DlOq3CajRpqS0Kg1IXpp7ZANS81Ip-HmfbCgIXWpO9Rl5lNKBUmoqKh-SM6i01ozyDdlfXGFxPkzOz0Voi68RD0vTeSy--4g4duNlrgWPzRIxFWEsvjnfub5437lUdGMxZ_kuLHGOIQyPyYPW9QmfnN4t-fHxw8Xuc7n_8ul8925fOgliLqVUvmKVA29cy71AD9xw16jKOGawZqxtuG6Ec1yBFLp26GrglAlumOSCb8mr1XeK4XrBNNuhSx773o0YlmSVFooryf8Pgs4cMxl88Rd4yEuNeQlrQKiqgupOiFHBqFQGMgQr5GNIKWJrp9gNLt5YoPaYml1Tszk1e0zNHo2fn4yXesDmVnGKKQNsBVJujZcYb3--y_XZKjqkOcTfpoJKQSHfcUter303OTulG-_i3Pkek19ixHG2_VVtObfC8jzDlrz8N_0n9gvSGMUI</recordid><startdate>20090801</startdate><enddate>20090801</enddate><creator>Schuller, Regina A</creator><creator>Kazoleas, Veronica</creator><creator>Kawakami, Kerry</creator><general>Springer</general><general>Springer US</general><general>American Psychological Law Society</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>87Z</scope><scope>88C</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88G</scope><scope>8AM</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FL</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>BGRYB</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>K7.</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M0O</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M0T</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2M</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PADUT</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>PYYUZ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7RZ</scope><scope>7U4</scope><scope>BHHNA</scope><scope>DWI</scope><scope>WZK</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20090801</creationdate><title>The Impact of Prejudice Screening Procedures on Racial Bias in the Courtroom</title><author>Schuller, Regina A ; Kazoleas, Veronica ; Kawakami, Kerry</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a514t-556c828a1c9af3c4ec1393ad689a29eb22fd37d4aa361547baeab130243925343</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2009</creationdate><topic>Adjudication</topic><topic>Adolescent</topic><topic>Attitudes</topic><topic>Attorneys</topic><topic>Behavioral Science and Psychology</topic><topic>Bias</topic><topic>Black People</topic><topic>Black White Relations</topic><topic>Canada</topic><topic>Challenges for cause</topic><topic>Community and Environmental Psychology</topic><topic>Courts</topic><topic>Criminal defenses</topic><topic>Criminology and Criminal Justice</topic><topic>Defendants</topic><topic>Embezzlement</topic><topic>Evidence</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Guilty verdicts</topic><topic>Human</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Interviews as Topic</topic><topic>Judgment</topic><topic>Juries</topic><topic>Jurors</topic><topic>Law and Psychology</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Mass Screening - legislation & jurisprudence</topic><topic>Mass Screening - standards</topic><topic>Original Article</topic><topic>Personality and Social Psychology</topic><topic>Prejudice</topic><topic>Prejudices</topic><topic>Psychology</topic><topic>Race</topic><topic>Race and Ethnic Discrimination</topic><topic>Racial Bias</topic><topic>Racial discrimination</topic><topic>Racial profiling</topic><topic>Racial Relations</topic><topic>Racism</topic><topic>Self evaluation</topic><topic>Social psychology</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Trials</topic><topic>Voir dire</topic><topic>White People</topic><topic>Young Adult</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Schuller, Regina A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kazoleas, Veronica</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kawakami, Kerry</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Healthcare Administration Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Psychology Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Criminal Justice Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>Criminology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Criminal Justice (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>ProQuest Criminal Justice</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Healthcare Administration Database</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Psychology</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Research Library China</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>APA PsycArticles®</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (pre-2017)</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Law and human behavior</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Schuller, Regina A</au><au>Kazoleas, Veronica</au><au>Kawakami, Kerry</au><au>Cutler, Brian</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The Impact of Prejudice Screening Procedures on Racial Bias in the Courtroom</atitle><jtitle>Law and human behavior</jtitle><stitle>Law Hum Behav</stitle><addtitle>Law Hum Behav</addtitle><date>2009-08-01</date><risdate>2009</risdate><volume>33</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>320</spage><epage>328</epage><pages>320-328</pages><issn>0147-7307</issn><eissn>1573-661X</eissn><coden>LHBEDM</coden><abstract>The current study examines the impact of the challenge for cause procedure and its effectiveness in curbing racial prejudice in trials involving Black defendants. Participants were provided with a trial summary of a defendant charged with either drug trafficking or embezzlement. The race of the defendant was either White or Black, with participants in the Black defendant condition receiving (prior to the trial presentation) either no challenge, a close-ended standard challenge, or a modified reflective pretrial questioning strategy. Overall, the results revealed an anti-Black bias in judgments. While the closed ended challenge did little to reduce this bias, the reflective format demonstrated a reduction in racial bias. Theoretical and applied implications of these findings are discussed.</abstract><cop>Boston</cop><pub>Springer</pub><pmid>18777203</pmid><doi>10.1007/s10979-008-9153-9</doi><tpages>9</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0147-7307 |
| ispartof | Law and human behavior, 2009-08, Vol.33 (4), p.320-328 |
| issn | 0147-7307 1573-661X |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_67463653 |
| source | APA PsycARTICLES; MEDLINE; HeinOnline Law Journal Library; Sociological Abstracts; SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings; EBSCOhost Business Source Complete |
| subjects | Adjudication Adolescent Attitudes Attorneys Behavioral Science and Psychology Bias Black People Black White Relations Canada Challenges for cause Community and Environmental Psychology Courts Criminal defenses Criminology and Criminal Justice Defendants Embezzlement Evidence Female Guilty verdicts Human Humans Interviews as Topic Judgment Juries Jurors Law and Psychology Male Mass Screening - legislation & jurisprudence Mass Screening - standards Original Article Personality and Social Psychology Prejudice Prejudices Psychology Race Race and Ethnic Discrimination Racial Bias Racial discrimination Racial profiling Racial Relations Racism Self evaluation Social psychology Studies Trials Voir dire White People Young Adult |
| title | The Impact of Prejudice Screening Procedures on Racial Bias in the Courtroom |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-03T07%3A02%3A36IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20Impact%20of%20Prejudice%20Screening%20Procedures%20on%20Racial%20Bias%20in%20the%20Courtroom&rft.jtitle=Law%20and%20human%20behavior&rft.au=Schuller,%20Regina%20A&rft.date=2009-08-01&rft.volume=33&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=320&rft.epage=328&rft.pages=320-328&rft.issn=0147-7307&rft.eissn=1573-661X&rft.coden=LHBEDM&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s10979-008-9153-9&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E40540125%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=204205691&rft_id=info:pmid/18777203&rft_jstor_id=40540125&rfr_iscdi=true |