Prospective lawyers' rape stereotypes and schematic decision making about rape cases

Authors: Krahe, Barbara1; Temkin, Jennifer2; Bieneck, Steffen1; Berger, Anja1

Source: Psychology, Crime and Law, Volume 14, Number 5, October 2008 , pp. 461-479(19)

Publisher: Routledge, part of the Taylor & Francis Group

Key:
Free Content - Free Content
New Content - New Content
Subscribed Content - Subscribed Content
Free Trial Content - Free Trial Content

Abstract:

Two studies explored stereotypic information processing in rape cases by prospective lawyers in Germany. In Study 1, 451 undergraduate law students rated rape scenarios varying with respect to defendant-complainant relationship and coercive strategy (force versus exploitation of the complainant's alcohol-induced defencelessness). Acceptance of rape myths was also measured. Likelihood of defendant liability was rated to be lower when there was a prior relationship between the parties and when the defendant exploited the complainant's defencelessness as compared to when he used force (except in the ex-partner rapes where blame was higher in the alcohol-related than in the force-related cases). Complainant blame was higher when there was a prior relationship between the parties and was higher in the alcohol-related cases than in the force-related cases, except in the ex-partner rape where the pattern was reversed. Participants with high rape myth acceptance held the defendant less liable and blamed the complainant more, especially when the two had known each other. Study 2 largely replicated these findings with 129 postgraduate trainee lawyers and showed that sentencing recommendations also varied as a function of defendant-complainant relationship and coercive strategy. Providing participants with the legal definition of rape did not reduce reliance on rape stereotypes.

Keywords: Rape; rape attitudes rape myths; judicial decision making; blame attribution

Document Type: Research article

DOI: 10.1080/10683160801932380

Affiliations: 1: Department of Psychology, University of Potsdam, Golm, Germany 2: School of Law, The Sussex Institute, University of Sussex, Falmer, Brighton, UK

The full text electronic article is available for purchase. You will be able to download the full text electronic article after payment.

$45.09 plus tax      Refund Policy

 

OR

Back to top

Key:
Free Content - Free Content
New Content - New Content
Subscribed Content - Subscribed Content
Free Trial Content - Free Trial Content
Share this item with others: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
Page Help Click here for Page Help
Shopping cart
Tools
Sign in






Need to register?
Sign up here
Text size: A | A | A | A