White mock jurors' moral emotional responses to viewing female victim photographs depend on the victim's race.

OBJECTIVE: Jurors often see both premortem photographs of female murder victims before death and postmortem photographs after death. Postmortem photographs are often probative but might prejudicially heighten jurors' other-condemning emotions, such as anger and disgust. Premortem photographs are often not probative and might prejudicially heighten jurors' other-suffering emotions, such as sympathy and empathy. We examined how victim race changes the impact of pre- and postmortem photographs on participants' moral emotions and, in turn, their verdicts. HYPOTHESES: We hypothesized that seeing postmortem (vs. no) photographs would increase convictions through other-condemning emotions for White, but not Latina or Black, victims. We also hypothesized that seeing both pre- and postmortem (vs. only postmortem) photographs would further increase convictions through other-suffering emotions, again for White, but not Latina or Black, female victims. METHOD: White participants (N = 1,261) watched a murder trial video. We manipulated the victim's race (White, Black, or Latina) and whether participants saw no victim photographs, premortem photographs of a female victim, postmortem photographs of a female victim, or both pre- and postmortem photographs. Participants reported the emotions they felt during the trial and chose a verdict. RESULTS: Seeing postmortem (vs. no) victim photographs increased White participants' guilty verdicts through other-condemning emotions when the female victim was White or Latina but not when she was Black. Seeing the combination of pre- and postmortem photographs increased White participants' convictions through other-suffering emotions when the victim was a White woman but not when she was Latina or Black. CONCLUSIONS: Attorneys and judges should consider that jurors' emotional reactions to victim photographs are felt selectively depending on the victim's race and could exacerbate racial biases in jurors' judgments. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Counterintuitive race effects in legal and nonlegal contexts.

OBJECTIVE: Despite documented racial disparities in all facets of the criminal justice system, recent laboratory attempts to investigate racial bias in legal settings have produced null effects or racial-bias reversals. These counterintuitive findings may be an artifact of laboratory participants' attempts to appear unprejudiced in response to social norms that proscribe expressions of racial bias against Black individuals. Furthermore, given pervasive stereotypes linking Black people with crime and heightened attention to issues of racial injustice in the legal system, laboratory participants may be especially likely to attempt to appear unprejudiced in studies examining judgments of Black individuals in legal as opposed to nonlegal contexts. HYPOTHESES: We predicted that counterintuitive race effects (null and pro-Black effects) are more likely to occur in laboratory research examining race in legal than in nonlegal contexts. METHOD: We conducted a quantitative review of race effects in three leading social psychology and legal psychology journals over the last four decades (Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin [PSPB]; Law and Human Behavior [LHB]; Psychology, Public Policy, and Law [PPPL]). We then conducted two experiments in which students (N = 314; Experiment 1) and Mechanical Turk workers (N = 695; Experiment 2) read descriptions of White and Black targets in either legal or nonlegal contexts and rated each target along various characteristics (e.g., dangerous, trustworthy). RESULTS: Our analysis of the literature indicated that counterintuitive race effects were more frequent in studies examining race in legal compared with nonlegal contexts. Our experiments likewise revealed that pro-Black race effects were stronger in legal than in nonlegal contexts. CONCLUSIONS: Laboratory research on racial bias against Black people-especially in legal settings-may produce misleading conclusions about the effects of race on important real-world outcomes. Methodological innovations for studying racial bias are needed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Can neuroimaging prove pain and suffering?: The influence of pain assessment techniques on legal judgments of physical versus emotional pain.

OBJECTIVES: It is difficult to "prove" pain and suffering-particularly emotional suffering. Neuroimaging technology might bolster pain claims in civil cases by making pain seem less subjective. We examined how neuroimaging of physical and emotional pain influences judgments of pain and suffering across nonlegal and legal contexts. HYPOTHESES: We hypothesized that participants would rate pain assessed using neuroimaging as more severe and award higher compensation than pain assessed using self-report measures. We also hypothesized that participants would rate physical (vs. emotional) pain as more severe, except when the pain claim was bolstered by a neuroimaging assessment. METHOD: In two experiments, we tested how pain assessment techniques influence perceptions of pain severity and monetary compensation differently for physical or emotional pain. Using a within-subjects design, participants (Experiment 1, N = 411, 59% male, 80% White) read 6 vignettes that described a person's chronic physical or emotional pain, evaluated using a clinical assessment, neuropsychological assessment, or neuroimaging assessment. We conceptually replicated Experiment 1 in a legal context (Experiment 2, N = 353, 42% male; 80% White) and tested whether the neuroimaging effect was due to knowing that the pain was assessed by neuroimaging or also required the inclusion of a neuroimage. RESULTS: When pain was assessed using neuroimaging (vs. non-neuroimaging assessments), participants rated the pain as more severe and gave larger monetary awards. When a person alleged physical (vs. emotional) pain, participants rated the pain as more severe and gave larger monetary awards. We conceptually replicated these findings in Experiment 2 and found that the neuroimaging effect was due to hearing about neuroimaging assessment and did not necessitate the inclusion of a neuroimage. CONCLUSION: Neuroimaging technology could be extremely useful for plaintiffs trying to overcome the difficult hurdle of proving their pain. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).