Papers by Margaret Kovera
Oxford University Press eBooks, 2010
Oxford University Press eBooks, Nov 1, 2012
Oxford University Press eBooks, Dec 1, 2012
Oxford University Press eBooks, 2010
Oxford University Press eBooks, 2010
Oxford University Press eBooks, Nov 1, 2012
Oxford University Press eBooks, Nov 1, 2012
Frontiers in psychology, Apr 12, 2024
Phenotypic mismatch between suspects and fillers but not phenotypic bias increases eyewitness ide... more Phenotypic mismatch between suspects and fillers but not phenotypic bias increases eyewitness identifications of Black suspects.
Law and Human Behavior, Oct 1, 2022
Journal of applied research in memory and cognition, Sep 1, 2021
Current Directions in Psychological Science, Nov 4, 2020
Lineups and photo arrays are often presented to witnesses by police officers who know which lineu... more Lineups and photo arrays are often presented to witnesses by police officers who know which lineup member is the suspect (single-blind lineup administration) rather than by officers who do not know (double-blind administration). Administrators who are not blind to which lineup member is the suspect are more likely than blind administrators to emit behavioral cues that steer witnesses toward choosing the suspect and away from choosing fillers (i.e., a lineup member who is not the suspect). Moreover, nonblind administrators may provide confirmatory feedback to witnesses who identify the suspect, increasing their confidence in the accuracy of their identification and weakening the correlation between witness confidence and accuracy. Nonblind administrators are also more likely to interpret witnesses' tentative statements about a suspect than about a filler as a positive identification. Because of these findings that single-blind administration biases identifications against suspects, even when they are innocent, evidence-based recommendations for best practices in the collection of eyewitness-identification evidence call for the use of doubleblind lineup-administration procedures.
Springer eBooks, 2016
One of the behavioral assumptions made by the legal system that has attracted attention is the no... more One of the behavioral assumptions made by the legal system that has attracted attention is the notion that jurors can make decisions which are free from bias. In an attempt to ensure that seated juries are comprised of jurors who are free from bias, venirepersons (i.e., potential jurors) are interviewed in a pretrial procedure called voir dire. During this procedure, venirepersons respond to questions that are designed to elicit responses that will allow judges and attorneys to evaluate whether they may have knowledge or biases that would interfere with the duty to evaluate the evidence fairly and make decisions that comport with the law. In this chapter, the psychological assumptions of legal actors about the identification of venireperson bias during voir dire, and the extent to which the process results in the removal of problematic jurors from jury service, are reviewed. The empirical literature from the first generation of jury selection research was devoted to identifying traits or developing attitudinal measures that predict juror verdicts. The chapter contains a review of several studies that represent a new generation of jury selection research that moves beyond mere prediction of venirepersons’ verdict inclinations to an evaluation of the extent to which social cognitive and social influence processes interfere with judges’ and attorneys’ abilities to effectively exercise challenges to venirepersons’ potential jury service.
Journal of Social Issues, Oct 31, 2019
Historically, research has shown that minorities, especially Blacks, are more likely to be arrest... more Historically, research has shown that minorities, especially Blacks, are more likely to be arrested and sentenced to prison terms than their White counterparts. Explanations of these findings range from those claiming that minorities differentially engage in deviant and criminal behavior, to those claiming that the criminal justice system (CJS) treats minorities differently. A related line of work has shown that minorities tend to view the CJS as less just or legitimate than Whites. Most explanations for this finding center on personal experiences of unjust treatment. However, research has also shown that vicarious experiences can influence perceptions of legitimacy toward the CJS and that Blacks often have more negative attitudes even when considering the same objective event as Whites. This article reviews relevant literatures then advances a theoretical linkage between racial disparity in criminal justice contact and legitimacy toward the law. At its base, the model suggests that differential treatment (either personal or vicarious) negatively impacts legitimacy, which in turn increases criminal behavior (and thus, racial disparities in criminal justice contact). The model is important for fully understanding racial differences in criminal behavior and criminal justice contact. Theoretical and empirical implications are discussed.
Uploads
Papers by Margaret Kovera