ArticlePsychology, crime & law : PC & L2025
The Role of Discrete Emotional Reactions to Child Sexual Abuse (CSA) Testimony in Mock Juror Decision-Making.
Article in Psychology, crime & law : PC & L, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Child sexual abuse (CSA) cases often involve graphic descriptions of abuse. Jurors may experience emotional reactions to this type of evidence, which may impact decision making. Two studies were conducted to understand mock jurors' emotions in response to children's testimony about alleged CSA, how emotions relate to moral outrage, objective verdict decisions, sentence recommendations, and witness evaluations. Jury-eligible participants (Study 1 N=143, Study 2 N=169) reported their emotions (i.e., anger, sadness, and disgust) before and after exposure to child testimony in a CSA case, and then provided case decisions (i.e., verdict decision, verdict confidence, sentencing length) and reported moral outrage. Participants experienced increases in all emotions from pre to post transcript, with the greatest increase in disgust. Moral outrage mediated the relationship between disgust and sentencing recommendations (Study 1 & 2), and between disgust and credibility ratings (Study 2). These studies reveal that CSA cases elicit negative emotions in jurors and emotions predict more punitive decision-making, posing a concern for objectivity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.