The Effects of Defendant and Complainant Intoxication on Mock Jurors' Judgments of Sexual Assault

Abstract

The present study investigates the impact of participant gender, rape-myth beliefs, and alcohol intoxication on the part of either the defendant and/or alleged victim on mock jurors' decisions within the context of a sexual-assault trial. Participants ( N = 152) were exposed to a sexual-assault case in which the beverage consumption (alcohol, cola) on the part of both the defendant and complainant prior to the sexual intercourse was varied systematically. Results indicated that when the defendant had consumed alcohol, as opposed to cola, participants were more likely to view the case as one of assault, to perceive the defendant as less credible, and to find the defendant guilty. When the complainant had consumed alcohol, as opposed to cola, participants found the complainant's claim less credible and were less likely to view the defendant as guilty. In addition, participants' rape-myth acceptance, which was related to guilt, mediated the relation between gender of participant and guilt.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 91 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.