ArticleJournal of autism and developmental disorders2026
Truly Sorry? Effects of Diagnostic Information on an Autistic Defendant's Perceived Remorse, Honesty, and Guilt.
Article in Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 2026. 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeNonverbal behaviors perceived as deception or lack of remorse share significant overlap with autism characteristics, possibly contributing to disproportionately negative outcomes in the criminal justice system. Disclosing an autism diagnosis during trial may help reduce bias and negative outcomes, however, research remains scarce. This study examined juror perceptions of autistic defendants using videotaped trial testimony, extending prior work.
methodsParticipants (n = 163) viewed videotaped testimony of an autistic defendant before being randomly assigned to one of three disclosure conditions (none, diagnosis only, or diagnosis and expert testimony). Participants rated the defendant's honesty, remorse, blame, and guilt and completed legal authoritarianism, autism attitudes, and autism exposure measures.
resultsIn contrast to previous findings, significant differences were not found between diagnostic disclosure type and ratings of defendant honesty, remorse, blame, or guilt when controlling for autism attitudes, autism exposure, and legal authoritarianism. Notably, floor and ceiling effects limit interpretation of these null findings, which may reflect facts of the case rather than an absence of disclosure effects. Exploratory analyses revealed participants with more prior exposure to autistic individuals and more positive autism attitudes consistently rated the defendant as more honest, less blameworthy, and less guilty, and disclosure type occasionally moderated these relationships.
conclusionAlthough methodological constraints limit conclusions regarding diagnostic disclosure effects, pre-existing attitudes toward autism consistently predicted juror perceptions, and expert testimony showed promise for reducing bias. These findings highlight the importance of informed disclosure strategies for legal practitioners and the need for further research on reducing bias for autistic defendants.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42360618What 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.