Gender, emotionality, and victim impact statements
| Pages | 107-120 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/20093821211264423 |
| Published date | 21 September 2012 |
| Date | 21 September 2012 |
| Author | Kristine A. Peace,Deanna L. Forrester |
| Subject Matter | Health & social care,Public policy & environmental management,Sociology |
Gender, emotionality, and victim impact
statements
Kristine A. Peace and Deanna L. Forrester
Abstract
Purpose – The present study aims to examine the influence of emotional content and gender pertaining
to victim impact statements (VIS) on sentencing outcomes.
Design/methodology/approach – The authors used a 2 (emotionality) £2 (participant gender) £2
(victim gender) £2 (statement gender) factorial design. Participants (n¼715) read a crime vignette
and corresponding VIS, and completed questionnaires pertaining to sentencing recommendations,
legal attitudes, and levels of emotional empathy (counterbalanced).
Findings – Results indicated that participant gender was related to the emotional appeal of the VIS, and
ratings of punishment severity. Emotional empathy was positively associated with perceptions of
credibility and emotionality.Higher legal attitudes scores were positively correlated with higher minimum
sentences, ratings of credibility, emotional appeal, as well as more severe punishments.
Originality/value – This study has important implications with respect to perceptions of VIS in relation to
how emotional they are, who the victim is, who the statement is written by,and who hears the statement.
Given the lack of previous research in this area, the study provides data that warrant further
investigation.
Keywords Victim impact statements, Emotion, Gender, Sentencing, Law enforcement, Criminals,
Punishment
Paper type Research paper
Victim impact statements (VIS) have been a topic of controversy in the criminal justice
system for manyyears, including their admissionin court and their purported influence
(Erez and Rogers, 1999).In Canada, increased attention towardsvictims rights in the
1980s prompted legislative changes to the Criminal Code, and mandatory consideration of
VIS during sentencing was imposed in 1996 (John Howard Society of Alberta, 1997). The
provisionof VIS now is a relatively standardized process, although the utility andeffectiveness
of such statementshave been questioned (Arrigo and Williams, 2003; Bandes,1996; Greene,
1999; McGowan andMyers, 2004; Talbert,1988). Further, recent research has demonstrated
that extra-legal factors (unrelated to the crime itself but provided in the victim impact
statement) may unduly influence sentencing outcomes (Greene et al., 1998; Jones and
Aronson, 1973; Sigall and Ostrove, 1975). For example, characteristics of the victim or the
person providingthe statement in court, suchas their gender or how emotional theyare, might
influence subsequent interpretations of ‘‘victimization’’ and sentencing outcomesdetermined
by either judges or jurors. These two variables (gender and emotionality) are common
variables in all statements, and the focus of the present study.
In general, VIS are written accounts provided by the victim (or victim’s family/spouse in
homicide cases; Alberta Solicitor General,2006) that are intended to convey to the court the
emotional and physical damage they have experienced as a result of the crime (Arrigo and
Williams, 2003; Greene, 1999; Luginbuhland Burkhead, 1995). They provide victimswith the
opportunity to participate in trials, have their voice heard, experience a sense of control and
influence, and be actively involved in the legal process (Forsterlee et al.,2004; Mezey, 2007).
DOI 10.1108/20093821211264423 VOL. 2 NO. 2 2012, pp. 107-120, QEmerald Group Publishing Limited, ISSN 2009-3829
j
JOURNAL OF CRIMINAL PSYCHOLOGY
j
PAGE 107
Kristine A. Peace is based
at Grant MacEwan
University, Edmonton,
Canada. Deanna L.
Forrester is based at the
University of Lethbridge,
Edmonton, Canada.
To continue reading
Request your trial