Just added to Volume 1:2009 of Open Access Journal of Forensic Psychology
http://www.forensicpsychologyunbound.ws/Heath, W. P., Grannermann, B. D., & Thompson, M. J. (2009). Perceptions of excuse defenses: Does it matter how much and whom you hurt? Open Access Journal of Forensic Psychology, 1, 68-98.
This research was supported in part by a Rider University Fellowship. Portions of this study were presented at the 2004 American Psychology- Law Society Conference in Scottsdale, AZ, USA. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Wendy P. Heath, Psychology Department, Rider University, 2083 Lawrenceville Road, Lawrenceville, NJ 08648, USA. Electronic Mail may be sent via Internet: heath@xxxxxxxxx
AbstractDefendants sometimes admit committing a crime, but provide an excuse for their actions. The effects of excuse defense type (highly versus less self-inflicted), victim respectability (highly, less), and assault severity (low, moderate, high) on mock jurors’ decisions were investigated. Defendants providing highly versus less self-inflicted excuses were seen less favorably (e.g., more guilty verdicts). Excuse defenses were more persuasive when the attack was less versus more severe. Less versus more respectable victims were seen as more responsible for the attack. Path analyses revealed that the defendant’s responsibility for his condition and assault severity directly and indirectly affected guilt ratings. Only assault severity directly affected sentencing. All other effects acted by changing perceptions of the defendant’s responsibility for his attack.
Gregory DeClue, Ph.D., ABPP (forensic) editor, Open Access Journal of Forensic Psychology http://ForensicPsychologyUnbound.ws gregdeclue@xxxxxx 16443 Winburn Place Sarasota, FL 34240-9228 phone 941-951-6674 gregdeclue@xxxxxxxxxx http://gregdeclue.myakkatech.com
