176 male and female college students read a description of a defendant and then sentenced the defendant with respect to five episodes depicting offense. The sex and parental status of the hypothetical defendant were varied. The results provided little support for the “practicality” hypothesis that defendants with children, especially female defendants, receive preferential treatment in criminal court. The data did show, however, that female defendants in general were treated more leniently than male defendants.
References
1.
AndersonE.The ‘chivalrous’ treatment of the female offender in the arms of the criminal justice system: Review of the literature. Social Problems, 1976, 23, 350–357.
2.
BroderE. W.Plaintiff's family status as affecting juror behavior. Journal of Public Law, 1965,14, 131–143.
3.
HuberJ.Toward a socio-technological theory of the women's movement. Social Problems, 1976, 23, 371–388.
4.
KalvernH.ZeiselH.The American jury: Boston: Little, Brown, 1966.
5.
LandyD.AronsonE.The influence of the character of the criminal and victim on the decisions of simulated jurors. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1969, 5, 141–152.
6.
NagelS.WeitzmanL.Double standards of American justice. Society, 1972, 9, 18–23.
7.
NeubauerD.Criminal justice in America. Morristown, N. J.: General Learning Press, 1974.
8.
SigallH.OstroveN.Beautiful but dangerous: Effects of offender attractiveness and nature of the crime in juridic judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1975, 31, 410–414.
9.
SimonR.The contemporary woman and crime. New York: Praeger, 1975.
10.
SteffensmeierD.The effects of judge's and defendant's sex on the sentencing of offenders. Psychology: A Journal of Human Behavior, 1977, 14, 3–9.
11.
WardD.KassebaumG.Women's prison: Sex and social structure. Chicago: Aldine, 1965.
