Date of this Version
Uwineza, T., Hurtz, M., Westerman, L., Boohar, E., Meyer, K., Kelchen, H., Eagan, S., & Gervais, S. (2020, April). Interactions between Need for Cognition and Ambivalent Sexism in Jurors’ Perceptions of Expert Credibility. Poster for the University of Nebraska-Lincoln Undergraduate Research Fair, Lincoln, NE.
The current study examined interactions between Need for Cognition scores (NCS) and Ambivalent Sexism scores (ASI; Hostile (HS) and Benevolent sexism (BS)) on perceptions of expert witness credibility. Participants (N = 467) with ages that ranged from 19–70 years (M=26.35, SD=9.20) completed the Need for Cognition Scale (Cacioppo & Petty, 1982), Ambivalent Sexism Inventory (Glick & Fiske, 1996), and Witness Credibility Scale (Brodsky, Griffin, & Cramer, 2010), and viewed a female expert witness providing scientific testimony in a civil trial. We hypothesized that 1) men who were low on need for cognition and high on benevolent sexism would perceive the female expert as less credible, and 2) men who were low on need for cognition and high on hostile sexism would perceive the female expert as less credible. Three-way ANOVAS were run and showed that Low NCS scores were significantly related to high BS (F=5.496, p=.020) among male jurors, and Low NCS were significantly related to high overall ASI for men (F=10.021, p=.002), but not for women (F=.390, p=.532). There was a significant three-way interaction of NCS, BS and juror gender on WCS for the female expert witness (F=7.230, p=.007). Hypothesis 1 was partially supported, since Low NCS scores were significantly related to less witness credibility, especially for men high in BS (*F=5.496, p=.020). Additionally, women with high NCS scores and high BS (*F=4.429, p=.036) were also significantly related to more witness credibility. Hypothesis 2 was not supported, because there was not a significant three-way interaction between NCS, HS and juror gender on WCS (F=.099, p=.753).