Exploring the boundaries of societally acceptable bias expression toward Muslim and atheist defendants in four mock-juror experiments

Publication date: Available online 3 October 2019Source: The Social Science JournalAuthor(s): Monica K. Miller, Jordan D. Clark, Mauricio J. AlvarezAbstractReligious minorities have experienced bias in many domains including the criminal justice system. The Normative Window of prejudice model posits that some bias expression is societally acceptable, while other bias expression is unacceptable and thus suppressed. Four mock-juror studies test the boundaries of normative expression of bias toward religious minorities. Participants expressed bias against (i.e., prejudice) Muslim defendants who commit violence motivated by religion (Study 1), yet also expressed bias toward (i.e., favoritism) Muslim defendants who commit violence in response to being attacked because of their religion (Study 2). Motive thus might determine whether bias expression is acceptable. Alternative explanations (religious activism; intentionality) are eliminated (Studies 3, 4). Results did not generalize to atheist defendants, who experienced little bias. Generally, Christian participants were more punitive than non-Christians, but there was little evidence of ingroup bias. These studies contribute to theory and literature by defining the circumstances that justify the expression of anti-Muslim bias. We conclude by suggesting that there are indeed societal norms regarding prejudice against religious minorities in the criminal justice system.

Source: The Social Science Journal - October 4, 2019 Category: Psychiatry & Psychology Source Type: research