Document Type



In the present study, we investigated perceived responsibility, evidence strengthening, and defendant gender in the context of a criminal trial involving DNA. Evidence was introduced post-trial and varied as strengthening the defendant’s guilt v. innocence. We also examined perceptions of perceived responsibility for verdict in order to more closely evaluate the role of regret in decision-making. Results indicated that DNA evidence is perceived as reliable, regardless of whether it strengthened guilt or innocence. In addition, greater confidence in verdict was observed when evidence strengthened the guilt of a female defendant vs. a male defendant. Finally, jurors experiencing high levels of regret perceived DNA evidence more selectively compared to jurors with low levels of regret, supporting the importance of identifying individual difference factors prior to trial.

Included in

Psychology Commons