The effect of information bias on the formation of impressions: courtroom implications
| Date | 06 February 2017 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/JCP-09-2016-0029 |
| Published date | 06 February 2017 |
| Pages | 47-57 |
| Author | Fernando Gordillo,Lilia Mestas,José M. Arana,Miguel Ángel Pérez,Eduardo Alejandro Escotto,Rafael Manuel López,Francisco Pérez |
| Subject Matter | Health & social care,Criminology & forensic psychology,Criminal psychology,Sociology,Sociology of crime & law,Deviant behaviour,Public policy & environmental management,Policing,Criminal justice |
The effect of information bias
on the formation of impressions:
courtroom implications
Fernando Gordillo, Lilia Mestas, José M. Arana, Miguel Ángel Pérez,
Eduardo Alejandro Escotto, Rafael Manuel López and Francisco Pérez
Abstract
Purpose –The ability to form impressions allows predicting future behaviour and assessing past conduct by
facilitating decision making in different contexts. Both verbal cues (what we know about someone) and
non-verbal cues (the emotion expressed) could modulate this process to a different degree. The purpose of
this paper is to analyse the relationship between these variables and their impact on the formation of
impressions within criminal proceedings.
Design/methodology/approach –An experiment was conducted that involved 142 Mexican students, who
evaluated emotional response (happiness, sadness, fear and anger) and personality (emotional stability, kindness,
responsibility, sociability and creativity) through the facial expression of a Spanish child-murderer. Two groups
were formed for comparative purposes, one of which was provided with information on the murderer (activated
information (AI)), while the second group had no related information whatsoever (deactivated information (DI)).
Findings –The results recordeda higher score for happiness (p¼0.037, η
2
¼0.03) and anger (p ¼0.001,
η
2
¼0.08), and a lower onefor sadness (p ¼0.002,η
2
¼0.06), fear (p¼0.002, η
2
¼0.07), emotional stability
(po0.001, η
2
¼0.09)responsibility (po0.001, η
2
¼0.10)and kindness (p ¼0.01, η
2
¼0.05)in the AI condition
compared to the DI condition.
Originality/value –The formation of impressions is an adaptive process that may be affected by variables
that are complex and difficult to control, which within legal proceedings might bias court decisions and
compromise the objectivity required of the judiciary.
Keywords Emotion, Bias, Facial expression, Formation of impressions, Perceived personality, Verbal context
Paper type Research paper
The formation of impressions has a long trajectory in social psychology (Asch, 1952; Heider,
1958), being defined as a human being’s ability to combine information on other people that is
sometimes incomplete in order to generate overall opinions. When forming an impression about
somebody, an inference is made about their personality, and so a general opinion is created
about their cognitive, emotional and behavioural processes. This is rendered possible by implicit
theories that determine how personality traits are configured within human beings (Bruner and
Tagiuri, 1954; Schneider et al., 1979), through categorisation mechanisms whose purpose is to
make up for a human being’s limited ability to process new information (Abele and Petzold,
1998). People generally act in accordance with these theories (Dweck, 2012; Leith et al., 2014).
In recent decades, and confirming the intuitive findings made by Asch (1952), it has been shown
that we are capable of making very precise judgements on other people’s personality, sexual
orientation and capabilities based on minimal, swift and automatic interactions (Albright et al.,
1988; Ambady et al., 1995, 2000; Ambady and Rosenthal, 1992; Bond et al., 1994); even
through the simple exposure to static facial expressions (Berry, 1990; Senft et al., 2016; Todorov
et al., 2009), where the facial structure would play a decisive role (Hehman et al., 2013; Noor and
Evans, 2003). Likewise, the presentation of words that describe a personality together with an
individual’s picture has a significant impact on the subsequent evaluation of that individual. This is
Received 26 September 2016
Revised 25 November 2016
Accepted 26 November 2016
This work was financially
supported by a grant from the
Camilo José Cela University (I+D+i
Research Grants). The authors of
this paper declare no conflict
of interest.
Fernando Gordillo is an
Associate Professor at
Camilo José Cela University,
Madrid, Spain.
Lilia Mestas is an Associate
Professor at the Facultad de
Estudios Superiores Zaragoza,
National Autonomous University
of Mexico, Mexico City, Mexico.
JoséM.AranaisanAssociate
Professorat the University of
Salamanca,Salamanca, Spain.
Miguel Ángel Pérez is an
Associate Professor at
Camilo José Cela University,
Madrid, Spain.
Eduardo Alejandro Escotto is
an Associate Professor at the
Facultad de Estudios
Superiores Zaragoza, National
Autonomous University of
Mexico, Mexico City, Mexico.
Dr Rafael ManuelLópez is
President of theBehavior and
Law Foundation, Madrid,Spain.
Francisco Pérez is an
Associate Professor at Camilo
José Cela University, Madrid,
Spain.
DOI 10.1108/JCP-09-2016-0029 VOL. 7 NO. 1 2017, pp. 47-57, © Emerald Publishing Limited, ISSN 2009-3829
j
JOURNAL OF CRIMINAL PSYCHOLOGY
j
PAG E 47
To continue reading
Request your trial