| Abstract |
The goal of the present research was to see if there are any situations in which angry jurors are not punitive towards the defendant as has been found previously [e.g. Georges et al. (2013). The angry juror: Sentencing decisions in first-degree murder. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 27, 156–166]. Using a case where a battered woman was on trial for killing her abuser, we measured Prolific participants’ anger and sadness before and after trial and their verdict decisions. In Study 1 (N = 115), females who were angrier gave less severe verdicts than females who were less angry, but this effect was not significant for males. When accounting for whom the emotion was directed toward in Study 2 (N = 654), mock juror gender was no longer a significant moderator. Instead, mock jurors who were angrier at the defendant, less sad at the defendant, less sympathetic toward the defendant, and more sympathetic toward the victim were more likely to give more severe verdicts, with defendant sympathy being the most consistent predictor. These findings indicate future psycho-legal research should consider the direction of mock jurors’ emotions. Further, legal actors should be cognizant of the potential biasing effect of jurors’ emotions at trial. |
, Narina Nuñez 
