Justice is not blind

Visual attention exaggerates effects of group identification on legal punishment

Yael Granot, Emily Balcetis, Kristin E. Schneider, Tom R. Tyler

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Why do some people demand harsher legal punishments than do others after viewing the same video evidence? We predict that inconsistent patterns of punishment decisions can be reconciled by considering the simultaneous effects of social group identification and visual attention. We tested 2 competing predictions-the attention unites and attention divides hypotheses-to understand whether visual attention exaggerates or eliminates differences in legal decision making as a function of social identification with outgroups. We measured social identification with police (Studies 1a, 1b) or manipulated identification with a novel outgroup (Study 2). Participants watched videos depicting physical altercations in which the targets' culpability was ambiguous. We surreptitiously tracked (Studies 1a, 2) or manipulated (Study 1b) visual attention to outgroup targets. Results support the attention divides hypothesis. Among participants who fixated frequently on outgroup targets, prior identification influenced punishment decisions. This relationship did not emerge among participants who fixated infrequently on the target. Subjective interpretations of and accurate recall for targets' actions mediated the relationship between identification and attention on punishment. We discuss implications for bias in legal decision making and policy.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)2196-2208
Number of pages13
JournalJournal of Experimental Psychology: General
Volume143
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - 2014

Fingerprint

Social Identification
Punishment
Social Justice
Decision Making
Police
Justice
Visual Attention

Keywords

  • Eye tracking
  • Legal decision making
  • Punishment
  • Social identification
  • Visual attention

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
  • Psychology(all)
  • Developmental Neuroscience
  • Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous)

Cite this

Justice is not blind : Visual attention exaggerates effects of group identification on legal punishment. / Granot, Yael; Balcetis, Emily; Schneider, Kristin E.; Tyler, Tom R.

In: Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, Vol. 143, No. 6, 2014, p. 2196-2208.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{c48be71110884d6bbc91d3364dc5865f,
title = "Justice is not blind: Visual attention exaggerates effects of group identification on legal punishment",
abstract = "Why do some people demand harsher legal punishments than do others after viewing the same video evidence? We predict that inconsistent patterns of punishment decisions can be reconciled by considering the simultaneous effects of social group identification and visual attention. We tested 2 competing predictions-the attention unites and attention divides hypotheses-to understand whether visual attention exaggerates or eliminates differences in legal decision making as a function of social identification with outgroups. We measured social identification with police (Studies 1a, 1b) or manipulated identification with a novel outgroup (Study 2). Participants watched videos depicting physical altercations in which the targets' culpability was ambiguous. We surreptitiously tracked (Studies 1a, 2) or manipulated (Study 1b) visual attention to outgroup targets. Results support the attention divides hypothesis. Among participants who fixated frequently on outgroup targets, prior identification influenced punishment decisions. This relationship did not emerge among participants who fixated infrequently on the target. Subjective interpretations of and accurate recall for targets' actions mediated the relationship between identification and attention on punishment. We discuss implications for bias in legal decision making and policy.",
keywords = "Eye tracking, Legal decision making, Punishment, Social identification, Visual attention",
author = "Yael Granot and Emily Balcetis and Schneider, {Kristin E.} and Tyler, {Tom R.}",
year = "2014",
doi = "10.1037/a0037893",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "143",
pages = "2196--2208",
journal = "Journal of Experimental Psychology: General",
issn = "0096-3445",
publisher = "American Psychological Association Inc.",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Justice is not blind

T2 - Visual attention exaggerates effects of group identification on legal punishment

AU - Granot, Yael

AU - Balcetis, Emily

AU - Schneider, Kristin E.

AU - Tyler, Tom R.

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - Why do some people demand harsher legal punishments than do others after viewing the same video evidence? We predict that inconsistent patterns of punishment decisions can be reconciled by considering the simultaneous effects of social group identification and visual attention. We tested 2 competing predictions-the attention unites and attention divides hypotheses-to understand whether visual attention exaggerates or eliminates differences in legal decision making as a function of social identification with outgroups. We measured social identification with police (Studies 1a, 1b) or manipulated identification with a novel outgroup (Study 2). Participants watched videos depicting physical altercations in which the targets' culpability was ambiguous. We surreptitiously tracked (Studies 1a, 2) or manipulated (Study 1b) visual attention to outgroup targets. Results support the attention divides hypothesis. Among participants who fixated frequently on outgroup targets, prior identification influenced punishment decisions. This relationship did not emerge among participants who fixated infrequently on the target. Subjective interpretations of and accurate recall for targets' actions mediated the relationship between identification and attention on punishment. We discuss implications for bias in legal decision making and policy.

AB - Why do some people demand harsher legal punishments than do others after viewing the same video evidence? We predict that inconsistent patterns of punishment decisions can be reconciled by considering the simultaneous effects of social group identification and visual attention. We tested 2 competing predictions-the attention unites and attention divides hypotheses-to understand whether visual attention exaggerates or eliminates differences in legal decision making as a function of social identification with outgroups. We measured social identification with police (Studies 1a, 1b) or manipulated identification with a novel outgroup (Study 2). Participants watched videos depicting physical altercations in which the targets' culpability was ambiguous. We surreptitiously tracked (Studies 1a, 2) or manipulated (Study 1b) visual attention to outgroup targets. Results support the attention divides hypothesis. Among participants who fixated frequently on outgroup targets, prior identification influenced punishment decisions. This relationship did not emerge among participants who fixated infrequently on the target. Subjective interpretations of and accurate recall for targets' actions mediated the relationship between identification and attention on punishment. We discuss implications for bias in legal decision making and policy.

KW - Eye tracking

KW - Legal decision making

KW - Punishment

KW - Social identification

KW - Visual attention

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84919896453&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84919896453&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1037/a0037893

DO - 10.1037/a0037893

M3 - Article

VL - 143

SP - 2196

EP - 2208

JO - Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

JF - Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

SN - 0096-3445

IS - 6

ER -