Mock Juror Gender Biases and Perceptions of Self-Defense Claims in Intimate Partner Homicide

Emily C. Hodell, Nesa E. Wasarhaley, Kellie Rose Lynch, Jonathan M. Golding

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

19 Scopus citations


Findings are reported from an experiment that examined mock jurors' gender biases regarding intimate homicide case adjudications. Mock jurors were more likely to convict a man than a woman who had killed an abusive partner, which was partially mediated by sympathy toward both the victim and defendant. Analyses revealed an abuser height and abuser gender interaction such that conviction rates for women defendants were higher when her abuser was taller compared to when he was shorter than she; abuser height did not influence conviction rates for men. Findings also suggested that when given information about a child being present, mock jurors perceived the killing of the abusive partner as an act to protect that child. The results are discussed in relation to how extra-legal factors impact juror perceptions of domestic violence cases in the courtroom.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)495-506
Number of pages12
JournalJournal of Family Violence
Issue number5
StatePublished - Jul 2014


  • Domestic violence
  • Gender biases
  • Intimate partner homicide
  • Juror perceptions

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Clinical Psychology
  • Social Sciences (miscellaneous)
  • Sociology and Political Science
  • Law


Dive into the research topics of 'Mock Juror Gender Biases and Perceptions of Self-Defense Claims in Intimate Partner Homicide'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this