Abstract
At least since Dion et al.’s (1972) seminal work, social scientists have known that looks can directly influence one’s quality of life. More recent research has also suggested that looks influence both suspect and victim experiences with the criminal justice system linking race, gender, and social status to criminal propensity; risk of victimization; and treatment by actors within the system. Indeed, much of Bonnie Berry’s early work has helped to demonstrate a relationship between physical appearance and life outcomes, while showing that perceptions of attractiveness can be socially constructed and influenced by sexism and racism. According to Berry, “white” and “heteronormative” features and behaviors are “typically” linked to beauty. Attractive people—by this distorted definition—are viewed as more socially favorable, which manifests through their having better jobs, happier marriages, and more satisfying lived experiences. Thus, perceptions of appearance can lead to the disenfranchisement of certain segments of society, such as racial minorities and members of the LGBTQ+ communities. Berry’s recent edited volume, Appearance Bias and Crime, synthesizes research in these areas, providing a broad overview of research linking “socially unappealing” traits to criminal involvement, risk of victimization, and treatment in the justice system.
“Appearance bias” includes visible aspects of physical features related to age, race, gender, sex, LGBTQ+ status, and more, which are analytically managed through the lens of intersectionality linking these variables to their corollary impact on system responses. This framework, therefore, links social equity to appearance, which Berry describes as “the last and least considered form of discrimination.” In response, this 15-chapter edited volume brings emerging research into conversation with seminal work in the area to present a clear argument for why scholars and activists should direct attention toward the impact of appearance on criminal justice outcomes.
The book is as empirically compelling as it is practically relevant. For example, in Chapter 6, “Becoming and Being a Woman Prisoner,” Chaney’s work shows the reader how physical traits, character, and tribal status interact to influence perceptions of dangerousness, blameworthiness, and lack of remorse. Accordingly, this can influence juror decision making, which leads to “women who face jury trials [being] judged on more than the evidence” (p. 134). In general, however, many groups face disparate treatment in the justice system based on their chosen presentation of self. To demonstrate this, Chaney notes a scenario wherein young persons of color, who have been conditioned to present a stoic demeanor as a survival mechanism for navigating challenging living environments, may not “present” the vision of remorse that some jurors associate with the proper performance of innocence. Challenging “pop-culture wisdom,” in Chapter 8, “Do Attractive Women Get Away With Traffic Violations? An Observational Study of Police Response to Traffic Stops,” Teasdale et al., in an observational “ride along” study, find that appearance—as measured by attractiveness—influences police decisions in traffic stops. Appearance matters in Chapter 9 too, “The Police Presence,” in which Bishop discusses how police appearance can shape public perceptions of legitimacy and, subsequently, influence behavioral responses to officer presence—either escalating or deescalating response under certain circumstances. Admittedly, we all learned something new from the text, such as the reality that men make up a significant portion of human trafficking victims but are not considered by many in the public as legitimately “vulnerable” (Chapter 5) or that employment and “life stressors” unexpectedly mediate the relationship between attractiveness and criminal involvement (Chapter 2).
We would be remiss not to admit that the quality of chapters varies. We imagine returning to some chapters over and over for their artfully structured literature reviews, for example, Chapter 7, “The Impact of Victim Attractiveness on Victim Blameworthiness and Defendant Guilt Determination in Cases of Domestic and Sexual Assault,” or Chapter 10, “Dressed to Kill: Jihadi Appearance and Its Significance In Austria and Beyond.” Berry’s concluding chapter, replete with policy implications and directions for future researchers, was one of the most instructive in the book. We agree with the most pressing, yet recalcitrant, of Berry’s recommendations: the need to systematically address and alter social bias associated with appearance and reshape the justice system’s response to it. This could, for example, be concretely affected by increased education and empirically based stigma/bias-reduction training directed at first responders. What the text appears to lack is a coherent chapter or section solely devoted to theory. In that regard, it seems that the book could have been made more complete with a chapter or two discussing how much of the presented research supports the status characteristic hypothesis outlined within the labeling tradition. As such, instructors interested in adopting Berry’s book may want to also consider supplementing the text with Paternoster and Iovanni’s (1989) seminal work as well as other more “recent” discussions of theories in this area.
Overall, Appearance Bias and Crime accomplishes its stated goal of fostering an understanding of the relationship between appearance bias, criminal activity, and the criminal justice system. The book’s broad, concise coverage rarely leaves the (intended) audience without necessary detail. Even when chapters overlap, the material included within each contributes to the overall concept, leaving no chapter ultimately expendable. Newcomers get a view into this growing field, while even the most experienced researcher should find a few inspirational kernels to take their research into new directions. We believe that the book is most appropriate for undergraduate students or as a supplement for newcomers to the topic at the graduate level. As an academic tool, we feel that this book would serve best as a supplementary text to an introduction-level undergraduate course focusing on disparate treatment of persons with differences, such as a class on race and ethnicity or LGBTQ+ studies.
