The Impact of Expert Testimony on Jurors’ Decisions: Gender of the Expert and Testimony Complexity†

  1. Regina A. Schuller1,*,
  2. Deborah Terry2,
  3. Blake McKimmie3

Article first published online: 31 JUL 2006

DOI: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2005.tb02170.x

Issue

Journal of Applied Social Psychology

Journal of Applied Social Psychology

Volume 35, Issue 6, pages 1266–1280, June 2005

Additional Information

How to Cite

Schuller, R. A., Terry, D. and McKimmie, B. (2005), The Impact of Expert Testimony on Jurors’ Decisions: Gender of the Expert and Testimony Complexity. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 35: 1266–1280. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2005.tb02170.x

Author Information

  1. 1

    York University Toronto, Ontario, Canada

  2. 2

    University of Queensland Brisbane, Australia

  3. 3

    Queensland University of Technology Brisbane, Australia

* Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Regina Schuller, Department of Psychology, York University, 4700 Keele Street, Toronto, Ontario M3J 1P3, Canada.

  • †

    The research reported herein was supported by a research grant from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada and a Fellowship from the Directorate of Science of the Australian Psychological Society. The authors thank Geoffrey Greenfield for his assistance in the early stages of this research project.

Publication History

  1. Issue published online: 31 JUL 2006
  2. Article first published online: 31 JUL 2006

SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

ARTICLE TOOLS

Get PDF (850K)

The present study investigated whether people used the gender of an expert witness as a heuristic cue to evaluate the evidence presented by the expert. Specifically, the gender of the expert and the complexity of the expert's testimony (low, high) were varied systematically within a simulated civil trial involving an antitrust price-fixing agreement. It was expected that the male expert would be more persuasive than the female expert, but only when the testimony presented was complex. As predicted, this interaction was revealed across a range of dependent measures. Somewhat unexpected was the finding of a female expert advantage in the low-complexity condition. The implications of these findings are discussed.

Get PDF (850K)