SAFETYLIT WEEKLY UPDATE

We compile citations and summaries of about 400 new articles every week.
RSS Feed

HELP: Tutorials | FAQ
CONTACT US: Contact info

Search Results

Journal Article

Citation

Curley LJ, Lages M, Sime PJ, Munro J. Behav. Sci. (Basel) 2024; 14(7).

Copyright

(Copyright © 2024, MDPI: Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute)

DOI

10.3390/bs14070619

PMID

39062442

PMCID

PMC11273493

Abstract

The Scottish verdict system includes three verdicts: 'guilty', 'not guilty' and 'not proven'. Politicians propose that the three-verdict system is partially to blame for the low conviction rate of rape, whereas research suggests that rape myths may be having a larger impact. To test the effects of varying verdict systems (guilty, not guilty and not proven; guilty and not guilty; a series of proven and not proven verdicts) and rape myths on juror verdicts. A total of 180 participants answered questions regarding their acceptance of rape myths using the Acceptance of Modern Myth and Sexual Aggression (AMMSA) scale. They then watched a staged rape trial filmed in a real courtroom and reached a verdict. Participants also provided longer-form answers on which thematical analysis was conducted. The main findings are as follows: (1) The special verdict system leads to a higher conviction rate than the other systems when rape myth acceptance is controlled for. (2) The higher the rape myth acceptance, the more favourably the accused was perceived and the less favourably the complainer was perceived.


Language: en

Keywords

juror decision-making; jury reform; not proven verdict; rape myths; Scottish legal system; three-verdict system

NEW SEARCH


All SafetyLit records are available for automatic download to Zotero & Mendeley
Print