The role of perceived defendant criminality on attributions and case outcomes

The race-crime congruence effect occurs when defendants accused of racially stereotypic crimes receive more punitive outcomes than those accused of non-stereotypic crimes. Additionally, data shows that specific facial cues elicit criminal stereotypes. However, limited data on how appearance-based inferences of criminality impact case judgments exists. Through two studies, we aimed 1) to expand the race-crime congruence effect literature by investigating differences in judgments towards Black, White, and Hispanic defendants, 2) to further explore the predictors of perceived defendant criminality, and 3) to examine the impact of perceived criminality on case judgments. Six hundred eighty-seven participants were randomly assigned to one of nine brief case summaries in a 3 (race) × 3 (stereotypic crime) factorial design and completed various measures. Contrary to predictions, no significant race-crime congruence effects were found along with mixed results regarding the predictors of perceived criminality. However, in study one, perceived criminality mediated the relationship between defendant race x participant prejudice and stability attributions. In study two, stability attributions mediated the relationship between perceived criminality and recommended punishments. These studies provide two substantial contributions to the literature. The results provide evidence of appearance-based inferences of criminality impacting perceptions of defendant behavior and judgments. Additionally, causal beliefs of defendant behavior may in part explain why one’s appearance impacts other’s judgments of them.