The impact of anti-gay bias on verdicts and sentencing with gay defendants

Abstract

Previous research has documented conviction bias against gay men in stereotype-consistent crimes driven by moral outrage, stereotype consistency, and anti-gay bias. However, research has not demonstrated this conviction bias in stereotype inconsistent crimes. Other research has shown that jurors high in right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) are lenient toward perpetrators of anti-gay hate crimes. However, authoritarianism and anti-gay bias have not been used to predict verdicts for gay defendants. This article examines the impact of juror gender, authoritarianism, sexual orientation, and anti-gay bias on verdicts for gay defendants in a stereotype consistent and stereotype inconsistent crime. Anti-gay bias and authoritarianism predicted convictions for gay defendants in both stereotype consistent and stereotype inconsistent crime scenarios, and the constructs were correlated. These findings add to the research base by showing that anti-gay bias and authoritarianism can predict verdicts for gay defendants in stereotype inconsistent cases.

Keywords:

• Anti-gay bias
• authoritarianism
• gay men
• individual differences
• juror bias
• juror decision making
• legal

Disclosure statement

The authors of this manuscript hereby certify that they have NO affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial interest or non-financial interest in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript.

Acknowledgments

This research was supported in part by the Diversity Research Award from the Minority Affairs Committee of the American Psychology-Law Society.

Notes

1 We use the term anti-gay bias to refer to prejudiced beliefs and stereotypes held by individuals toward sexual minority individuals (Herek, 2000). The measure of anti-gay bias used in the study focused exclusively on attitudes directed toward gay men.

2 Independent sample t-tests were conducted to examine whether scores on the MHS-G or PJAQ differed based on condition. All tests were insignificant (p > .05), indicating that condition did not affect measures of anti-gay bias or legal authoritarianism.