The Heterogeneity of Victim Impact Statements: A Content Analysis of Capital Trial Sentencing Penalty Phase Transcripts

Victim impact statements (VISs) are controversial in capital sentencing proceedings largely due to their questionable relevance to sentencing, the concern that characterizations of the victim may lead to arbitrary sentencing judgments, and the belief that the emotional nature of this evidence may be inflammatory. A sample of 192 capital trial VIS transcripts was analyzed for content as well as a linguistic analysis of emotionality. The findings reveal that these statements are highly varied, including their format, length, and relation between the witness and the victim. Despite a legislative mandate that they address the emotional, financial, and physical suffering experienced by victim survivors, testimony of this nature occurs in a minority of the cases. Most commonly, these statements tend to characterize the victim and their qualities, relay the witness’ shock at first learning of the victim’s death (i.e., trauma narratives), and address the significance of the deceased to the family unit. In approximately one third of the transcripts reviewed, the witness made mention of the defendant, but this rarely included any mention of a desire for vengeance or recommended punishment. Linguistic analysis revealed that emotional content was prevalent throughout the testimony, with sadness emerging as more pervasive than anger. However, the degree of emotional language contained in these statements was not particularly high—and was comparable to that typically encountered in everyday life (e.g., newspapers, novels). Implications, particularly with regard to the potential for VISs to be considered inflammatory, are discussed

Individual Conceptions of Well-Being Predict Psychological and Subjective Well-Being: Beyond the Big Five (Book Chapter)

Lay conceptions of well-being are multidimensional cognitive representations of the nature and experience of well-being and an important component of individuals’ worldview. Previous research indicates that these lay conceptions are composed of both hedonic (i.e., pleasure-focused) and eudaimonic (i.e., virtue- and meaning-focused) dimensions, and the degree to which one conceptualizes well-being in hedonic and eudaimonic terms has been found to be associated with multiple indicators of experienced well-being. Previous research is limited, however, in that it has often defined and operationalized experienced well-being using indicators of subjective well-being (SWB) and has not addressed associations between lay conceptions of well-being and psychological well-being (PWB). Additionally, previous research is further limited in that it has not considered more complex relationships between conceptions of well-being and general personality traits, specifically the Big Five, in predicting well-being. To address these limitations, this chapter presents research examining (1) whether hedonic and eudaimonic dimensions of individual conceptions of well-being predict both PWB and SWB and (2) whether individual conceptions of well- being predict unique variance in PWB and SWB beyond that predicted by the Big Five personality traits. Correlational analyses indicated more numerous and typically more robust associations between eudaimonic dimensions, compared to hedonic dimensions, and both PWB and SWB. Further, individual conceptions of well-being predicted unique variance in several dimensions of PWB and SWB when controlling for the Big Five, with eudaimonic dimensions being positively associated with well-being and hedonic dimensions being negatively associated with well-being. These findings thus complement a growing body of literature suggesting that eudaimonic approaches to well-being may be particularly important for positive psychological functioning

The Impact of Forensic vs. Social-Science Evidence on Judicial Decisions to Grant a Writ of Habeas Corpus

Wrongful conviction is a serious dilemma for the criminal-justice system. A joint investigation by the Better Government Association and the Center on Wrongful Convictions tracked exonerations from 1989 through 2010 and identified 85 people who were wrongfully incarcerated.1 Not only were those 85 lives unfairly affected in serious ways due to the incarceration, but the actual perpetrators continued on crime sprees that went on to include 14 murders, 11 sexual assaults, 10 kidnappings, and at least 62 other felonies.2 The reversal of false convictions is becoming more frequent.3 However, scholars have asserted that the exonerations that do occur are probably a small fraction of actual wrongful convictions. Gross and colleagues pointed out that “[o]ur legal system places great weight on the finality of criminal convictions. Courts and prosecutors are exceedingly reluctant to reverse judgments or reconsider closed cases; when they do—and it’s rare—it’s usually because of a compelling showing of error.”4 Therefore, in order for a wrongful conviction to be overturned, these cases must undergo a lengthy appeals process

Social Perceptions of Facial Traits: A Pilot Study

Past research suggests facial traits (i.e., race, Afrocentric features, trustworthiness) influence social perceptions due to stereotypes and prejudice. A pilot study was conducted to identify face images that would satisfy conditions of future studies. Two hundred and sixty-nine Mechanical Turk participants were randomly presented and asked to rate 23 out of 73 possible images from the Chicago Face Database on numerous appearance characteristics (i.e., Afrocentric appearance, trustworthiness, anger). Our hypotheses were confirmed through several ANOVAs, such that trustworthy, neutral, and untrustworthy faces as well as more or less Afrocentric faces received significantly different trustworthy and Afrocentric ratings, respectively. Additionally, White men were perceived as significantly less trustworthy than Black men. Black men were perceived as more Afrocentric than white men, though we detected significant variability within races. Finally, untrustworthy faces were perceived as angrier than trustworthy faces, supporting an emotion-trustworthiness continuum. Implications for future research and theory are discussed

Hearsay Testimony in Elder Abuse Cases: A Gray Area at Best

A surge in the number of older adults in the population has given rise to an increase in reported elder abuse cases. Because some courts perceive alleged victims who are older adults to have unique needs, special accommodations are being made for them in the courtroom, including the use of hearsay testimony. A hearsay witness is someone who testifies to out-of-court statements made by another person, usually the alleged victim. The hearsay witness may testify in lieu of the declarant\u27s testifying in open court due to unavailability. The use of hearsay witnesses can be troubling given the research that exists on the questionable reliability of the declarant and the hearsay witness, the lack of accuracy, and the unnecessary bias that can occur when evaluating the credibility of the witness. This commentary elaborates on the reasons why the use of hearsay, especially as a special protection for older adults, should be limited

Opening the Gait! Effects of Witness Type and Identification Factors on Mock-Juror Decision-Making

Surveillance cameras are used by law enforcement for many purposes, including security, monitoring, and investigating crimes. Although studies have examined participants\u27 ability to accurately match previously viewed faces with faces viewed on surveillance video, few studies have investigated the effects of witness face identification expertise and identification factors on mock-juror decision making. The current study investigated perpetrator identification factors (Multiple identification factors: physical stature, gait, face, clothing vs. gait only) and witness type (detective vs. layperson) on juror decision-making. Participants (n = 239) read a trial transcript depicting an arson and were asked to rate witness effectiveness and reliability and fairness of the identification from the surveillance footage. Results indicated that jurors were more likely to convict when the witness’s identification relied on gait only. These results imply that jurors view one perpetrator identification characteristic, gait, as more precise and therefore more distinctive

The Impact of Forensic vs. Social-Science Evidence on Judicial Decisions to Grant a Writ of Habeas Corpus

Wrongful conviction is a serious dilemma for the criminal-justice system. A joint investigation by the Better Government Association and the Center on Wrongful Convictions tracked exonerations from 1989 through 2010 and identified 85 people who were wrongfully incarcerated.1 Not only were those 85 lives unfairly affected in serious ways due to the incarceration, but the actual perpetrators continued on crime sprees that went on to include 14 murders, 11 sexual assaults, 10 kidnappings, and at least 62 other felonies.2 The reversal of false convictions is becoming more frequent.3 However, scholars have asserted that the exonerations that do occur are probably a small fraction of actual wrongful convictions. Gross and colleagues pointed out that “[o]ur legal system places great weight on the finality of criminal convictions. Courts and prosecutors are exceedingly reluctant to reverse judgments or reconsider closed cases; when they do—and it’s rare—it’s usually because of a compelling showing of error.”4 Therefore, in order for a wrongful conviction to be overturned, these cases must undergo a lengthy appeals process