Abstract
The current study examined the utility of expert testimony of the battered person syndrome (BPS) in a case of duress and the
extent to which defendant gender, defendant sexual orientation, and participant gender influence mock jury decisions in a
case of duress. Participants (N = 413) read a scenario based on U.S. v. Dixon (2006) and answered questions assessing verdict, guilt, sentence length, duress legal elements, and attributes typically ascribed
to victims of abuse. Results showed heterosexual female defendants were assigned the lowest sentences and met more of the
legal elements of duress (i.e., were coerced, more likely to be believed, and purchased a gun to prevent harm) and attributes
(i.e., experienced severe abuse, learned helplessness) compared to other defendants. When mock jurors received expert testimony,
they provided lower rates of guilt and sentencing for defendants. Results also showed the inclusion of BPS expert testimony
increased ratings for many of the legal elements of duress and attributes typically associated with intimate partner violence.
In addition, results suggested that while heterosexual female defendants are more likely to be believed in a case of duress,
expert testimony of BPS is helpful to all defendants. Limitations and future directions for research and practice are discussed.
extent to which defendant gender, defendant sexual orientation, and participant gender influence mock jury decisions in a
case of duress. Participants (N = 413) read a scenario based on U.S. v. Dixon (2006) and answered questions assessing verdict, guilt, sentence length, duress legal elements, and attributes typically ascribed
to victims of abuse. Results showed heterosexual female defendants were assigned the lowest sentences and met more of the
legal elements of duress (i.e., were coerced, more likely to be believed, and purchased a gun to prevent harm) and attributes
(i.e., experienced severe abuse, learned helplessness) compared to other defendants. When mock jurors received expert testimony,
they provided lower rates of guilt and sentencing for defendants. Results also showed the inclusion of BPS expert testimony
increased ratings for many of the legal elements of duress and attributes typically associated with intimate partner violence.
In addition, results suggested that while heterosexual female defendants are more likely to be believed in a case of duress,
expert testimony of BPS is helpful to all defendants. Limitations and future directions for research and practice are discussed.
- Content Type Journal Article
- Category ORIGINAL ARTICLE
- Pages 1-12
- DOI 10.1007/s10896-012-9459-8
- Authors
- Brenda Russell, Department of Applied Psychology, Pennsylvania State University, Berks, P.O. Box 7009, Tulpehocken Road, Reading, PA 19610, USA
- Laurie Ragatz, Department of Psychology, Georgia Health Sciences University, Augusta, GA, USA
- Shane W. Kraus, Department of Psychology, Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green, OH, USA
- Journal Journal of Family Violence
- Online ISSN 1573-2851
- Print ISSN 0885-7482