Note takers who review are less vulnerable to the influence of stereotypes than note takers who do not review

Abstract

The current research investigated whether the opportunity to review reduced note takers' vulnerability to the influence of stereotypes when making decisions. Participants were presented with a trial in which a man or a woman had been charged with a stereotypically masculine crime. Results revealed that note takers who did not review were more likely to find a man guilty than a woman, and attributed a higher degree of offender relevant traits to a man than to a woman. Non-note takers and note takers who reviewed did not engage in stereotype-based processing. It was concluded that the provision of dedicated review periods reduced the extent to which note takers were influenced by stereotypes during decision making. Future research may consider investigating whether the benefit of dedicated review periods remains when jurors are presented with longer trials and when they are required to engage in deliberation.

Keywords:

• Note taking and review
• juror
• stereotype
• dual process models of persuasion

Notes

1. That is not to say that non-note takers will always avoid the influence of stereotypes. In contexts in which there is cognitive load (e.g. longer trials; more complex trials) non-note takers may rely on stereotypes to aid information processing. The extent to which non-note takers are able to recognise and overcome such bias compared to the evaluative processes engaged in by note takers who do not review or note takers who review is a question for future research.