Implicit Theories and Capital Sentencing: An Experimental Study
Jeremy A. Blumenthal
Syracuse University - College of Law
1st Annual Conference on Empirical Legal Studies Paper
Social psychological research shows that some individuals ("entity theorists") view others as possessing fixed, unchanging moral traits; some individuals ("incremental theorists") see others' moral traits as malleable and dynamic. Such individual differences in implicit theories reliably predicts people's levels of punitiveness, their endorsement of certain moral theories and punitive philosophies, their likelihood of stereotyping others, and other legally relevant judgments. Empirical legal research on such beliefs relevant to the law, however, is almost non-existent. Accordingly, in three experimental mock juror studies, I investigated the effect of respondents' implicit theory on their capital sentencing decisions. Primary results demonstrate that across samples, (1) incremental theorists are less likely to impose a death sentence; and (2) entity theorists are more willing to impose a death sentence when the defendant is African-American. Policy implications are discussed.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 33
Keywords: juror decision making, mock juror experiment, capital sentencing, law and psychology, implicit theories
Date posted: June 19, 2006
© 2016 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollobot1 in 0.968 seconds