| The present research examines the role stereotyped expectations of behavior and weapon use play in mediating culpability and social judgments of a defendant claiming the battered woman syndrome (BWS) as defense in a victim-precipitated homicide case. Using norm theory as a guide, it was hypothesized that when a defendant's behaviors are not in accordance with stereotyped impressions of BWS (e.g. stereotype-inconsistent), pre-existing norms are violated, resulting in more severe evaluations. In addition, mode of retaliation, historically, has been relegated to domain; guns remain in the domain of male use, while knives have been associated with female use. It is suggested female judges will be more influenced by the violent nature of knife use, resulting in more severe judgments for a knife-using defendant, than male judges, who will be influenced by weapon use associated with the male domain.;Experiment 1 presented a female defendant who killed her male roommate with either a gun or knife, absent of domestic abuse information. Females judged the knife-using defendant more severely, while males were more severe in their judgment of the gun-using defendant. Experiment 2 presented a detailed trial account of a female defendant who killed her abusive husband with either a gun or knife. BWS is presented as support for a self-defense claim. Subjects provided verdict judgments, sentencing recommendations, attributions of blame and personal fortitude, Just World, Bem Sex Role Inventory, and gender-stereotyping scores. Results confirmed that males judged the inconsistent gun-target more harshly than in other conditions. Females judged the inconsistent knife-target more harshly than the inconsistent gun-target, but judged the consistent gun-target most severely. Findings indicated that the inconsistent defendant, while often judged more severely for her actions, also received higher ratings on attributions of personal fortitude. These data advance evidence that inconsistent information can play an important role in the judgments of a defendant when that information aids in guiding the perceiver's inferences for causality, and extends our knowledge of stereotype-based expectancies in the domain of weapons. Discussion centers on prior findings that inconsistent information is discounted, individuating information can outweigh categorical, and norm theory's variant/prototype comparison. Legal application of stereotypic information is addressed. |
