The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
1
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc
TYPE
Original Research
PAGE NO.
1-8
10.37547/tajpslc/Volume07Issue06-1
OPEN ACCESS
SUBMITED
11 April 2025
ACCEPTED
5 May 2025
PUBLISHED
1 June May 2025
VOLUME
Vol.07 Issue06 2025
CITATION
Dr. Hannah McAllister, & Dr. Zoe Nguyen. (2025). Gender Dynamics in
the Courtroom: The Influence of Prosecutor’s Sex on Perceptions of
Defendant Culpability. The American Journal of Political Science Law
and
Criminology,
7(06),
01
–
08.
Retrieved
from
https://theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc/article/view/6222
COPYRIGHT
© 2025 Original content from this work may be used under the terms
of the creative commons attributes 4.0 License.
Gender Dynamics in the
Courtroom: The
Influence of
Prosecutor's Sex on
Perceptions of
Defendant Culpability
Dr. Hannah McAllister
Centre for Gender Studies, University of Melbourne
Dr. Zoe Nguyen
School of Criminology and Criminal Justice, University of New South Wales
(UNSW)
Abstract:
The role of the prosecutor in the criminal
justice system is imbued with significant power and
discretion, influencing charging decisions, plea bargains,
and ultimately, the perception of defendant culpability.
While extensive research has explored factors affecting
juror and public perceptions of guilt, the impact of the
prosecutor's gender remains an underexplored area.
This article investigates how the gender of a prosecutor
might influence perceptions of a defendant's culpability,
drawing upon theories of gender stereotypes and role
congruity. Through a comprehensive literature review,
we examine the powerful role of prosecutors, the
mechanisms of culpability perception, and the broader
effects of gender in professional and legal contexts. This
review outlines a hypothetical experimental design to
empirically test this relationship, discussing potential
findings and their implications for fairness, bias, and
professional development within the legal system.
Understanding these gender dynamics is crucial for
fostering a more equitable and just legal process.
Keywords:
Prosecutor Gender, Defendant Culpability,
Perceptions, Criminal Justice, Gender Stereotypes, Role
Congruity Theory, Plea Bargaining, Legal Profession.
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
2
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
INTRODUCTION
The criminal justice system in the United States is a
complex and often opaque machinery, with various
actors wielding significant influence over the trajectory
of legal proceedings and, ultimately, the lives of
defendants. Among these actors, the prosecutor holds
an exceptionally powerful position. Prosecutors possess
vast discretion in deciding whether to bring charges,
what charges to pursue, and whether to offer plea
bargains, which resolve the vast majority of criminal
cases [1, 6, 14]. This immense power shapes the entire
criminal justice landscape [11].
Central to the prosecutor's role is the task of convincing
judges and juries (or even defendants themselves during
plea negotiations) of a defendant's culpability.
Perceptions of defendant culpability are multifaceted,
influenced
by evidence
presented, eyewitness
statements [5], defense arguments [27], and even
demographic variables of the public or jurors [16].
However, an increasingly recognized factor in legal
outcomes and perceptions is the demographic
characteristics of the legal professionals themselves.
While research has examined the impact of defendant
gender, race, and socioeconomic status, the influence of
the prosecutor's gender on how a defendant's
culpability is perceived remains a nascent but critical
area of inquiry.
The legal profession, traditionally male-dominated, has
seen a gradual increase in female representation, with
women now comprising a significant portion of lawyers
and judges [2]. Despite this progress, gender stereotypes
and role incongruity theories suggest that women in
traditionally masculine roles may face unique challenges
in terms of perceived authority, credibility, and
effectiveness [17, 18, 24]. These theories posit that
individuals evaluate leaders and professionals based on
their congruence with gender stereotypes associated
with their role. If the role (e.g., prosecutor, which
demands assertiveness and dominance) conflicts with
traditional female stereotypes (e.g., communal,
nurturing), it can lead to prejudice and biased
evaluations [17, 18, 24, 25].
This article aims to explore the potential influence of
prosecutor gender on perceptions of defendant
culpability. By synthesizing existing literature on
prosecutorial power, the formation of culpability
perceptions, and the impact of gender in professional
contexts, we seek to illuminate how a prosecutor's sex
might subtly or overtly shape the perception of a
defendant's guilt. Understanding these dynamics is vital
for identifying potential sources of bias within the legal
system and for promoting a more equitable
administration of justice.
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1. The Expansive Power of the Prosecutor:
The prosecutor in the US criminal justice system holds
extraordinary power, often described as the "most
powerful actor" [11]. Their discretion extends from the
initial charging decision to the final resolution of a case,
largely through plea bargaining [1, 11, 14]. Plea bargains
account for over 90% of criminal convictions, making the
prosecutor's role in shaping outcomes far more
significant than that of the trial judge or jury in most
cases [14]. This immense power is largely unreviewable,
leading to concerns about arbitrary justice [11] and the
potential for innocent defendants to plead guilty [13].
Prosecutors are often incentivized by conviction rates
[9], which can further influence their decisions. The "war
on crime" narrative has also contributed to the
expansion of prosecutorial power [4].
2.2. Factors Influencing Perceptions of Defendant
Culpability:
Perceptions of a defendant's culpability are complex and
can be influenced by a myriad of factors beyond the
direct evidence presented.
•
Evidence and Testimony: Eyewitness statements,
even if inconsistent, can significantly impact mock
jurors' evaluations of credibility and perceptions of
culpability [5].
•
Defendant Characteristics: While not directly
related to guilt, factors like a defendant's demeanor,
prior record [28], and even physical appearance can
subtly influence perceptions.
•
Attorney Presentation Style: The way an attorney
presents a case, including their communication
style, can affect juror decisions [20].
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
3
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
•
Cognitive Biases: Decision-making in the criminal
justice system is susceptible to cognitive biases [12],
which can unconsciously shape perceptions of guilt.
•
Public Opinion and Attitudes: Broader public
perceptions of criminal courts are influenced by
demographic and attitudinal variables [16].
2.3. Gender and Professional Perceptions: Role
Congruity Theory:
Research across various professional fields consistently
demonstrates that gender can influence perceptions of
competence, credibility, and effectiveness.
•
Gender Stereotypes: Society holds prescriptive
gender stereotypes that dictate how men and
women "should" behave [17, 18]. Men are often
stereotyped as agentic (e.g., assertive, dominant,
decisive), while women are stereotyped as
communal
(e.g.,
nurturing,
cooperative,
empathetic) [17, 18].
•
Role Congruity Theory: This theory posits that
prejudice against female leaders or professionals
arises when their social role (e.g., prosecutor) is
perceived as incongruent with traditional gender
stereotypes for women [17, 18, 25]. For a
prosecutor, traits like assertiveness, aggression, and
a focus on winning (agentic traits) are often seen as
necessary. When a woman occupies this role, her
behavior may be evaluated negatively if it deviates
from communal stereotypes, or she may be
perceived as less competent if she embodies
communal traits that are seen as incongruent with
the role [17, 18, 25].
•
Credibility and Persuasion: In legal settings, the
gender of an attorney can impact their perceived
credibility and persuasiveness [21, 23]. Some studies
suggest that female attorneys may face challenges
in establishing credibility or may be perceived
differently than male counterparts [21, 23]. For
example, some argue that a female criminal defense
lawyer might be advantageous in sex crime cases
due to perceived empathy or less aggressive
questioning [Blank Law, 2022]. Women in
negotiation contexts can also face challenges in
claiming authority and may be evaluated differently
when requesting higher salaries [3, 7, 22].
•
Public Support and Ideology: Gender-stereotyped
evaluations can impact support for women
candidates in politics [15], and political ideology
itself has evolutionary foundations that may
intersect with gender perceptions [12].
2.4. Gender in the Legal Profession and Prosecutorial
Role:
While women have made strides in the legal profession,
their representation in certain roles, like prosecutors,
and their perceived effectiveness, may still be
influenced by gender dynamics. The American Bar
Association's profile of the legal profession shows
increasing diversity [2], but challenges persist [2, 19].
Women in leadership roles, including in the judiciary,
can still face biases [19]. The immense power of
prosecutors [11] means that any gender-based biases in
how they are perceived could have significant
implications for justice outcomes. The defense lawyer's
plea recommendation, for instance, is influenced by
perceived guilt and probability of conviction [20], and
these perceptions could be subtly shaped by the
prosecutor's gender.
Synthesizing this literature, it is plausible that a
prosecutor's gender could influence perceptions of
defendant culpability. A female prosecutor, operating in
a traditionally male-dominated and agentic role, might
face role incongruity, potentially affecting her perceived
credibility or the perceived strength of her case, which
could, in turn, impact how culpable a defendant is seen.
3. METHODOLOGY
To investigate the influence of prosecutor gender on
perceptions of defendant culpability, a controlled
experimental design involving mock jurors would be
employed.
This
methodology
allows
for
the
manipulation of the independent variable (prosecutor
gender) while controlling for other confounding factors.
3.1. Participants:
A sample of approximately 300-400 adult participants
would be recruited from the general population (e.g.,
through
online
platforms
or
community
advertisements) to serve as mock jurors. Participants
would be screened to ensure they have no prior legal
experience (e.g., as a lawyer, judge, or law enforcement
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
4
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
officer) and are eligible for jury duty in their jurisdiction.
Demographic information (age, gender, education,
political ideology, prior jury experience) would be
collected for potential covariate analysis.
3.2. Experimental Design:
A between-subjects experimental design would be
utilized, with prosecutor gender (male vs. female) as the
primary independent variable. Participants would be
randomly assigned to one of two conditions:
•
Condition 1: Male Prosecutor
•
Condition 2: Female Prosecutor
3.3. Materials:
•
Case Vignette: A standardized, fictional criminal case
vignette would be developed. The case should be
ambiguous enough regarding guilt to allow for
variation in culpability perceptions, but not so
ambiguous as to be nonsensical. It would involve a
moderately serious felony (e.g., aggravated assault,
grand larceny) to ensure participant engagement.
The vignette would include a clear prosecution
narrative and a defense narrative, along with key
pieces of evidence.
•
Prosecutor Profiles: Two identical prosecutor
profiles would be created, differing only in the name
and gender-identifying pronouns. These profiles
would include details such as years of experience,
educational background, and a brief description of
their professional approach (e.g., "known for their
meticulous
preparation
and
persuasive
arguments").
•
Trial Presentation (Text/Video): Participants would
be presented with the case information and the
prosecutor's closing argument. To control for
variations in presentation style, the closing
argument would be pre-scripted and identical across
conditions.
•
Option A (Text-based): Participants read the case
vignette and the prosecutor's closing argument,
with the prosecutor's gender indicated by name and
pronouns.
•
Option B (Video-based - preferred for realism):
Professional actors (one male, one female) would
deliver the identical pre-scripted closing argument.
This allows for control over non-verbal cues (e.g.,
tone, gestures) while manipulating only the
perceived gender.
•
Dependent
Measures
Questionnaire:
After
reviewing the case and the prosecutor's argument,
participants would complete a questionnaire
assessing:
•
Perceived Defendant Culpability: A multi-item scale
(e.g., 1-7 Likert scale) asking participants to rate the
likelihood of the defendant's guilt, how responsible
they believe the defendant is, and whether the
defendant should be convicted.
•
Prosecutor Credibility: A multi-item scale assessing
the perceived trustworthiness, competence, and
persuasiveness of the prosecutor.
•
Sentencing Recommendation: An open-ended or
scaled question asking for a recommended sentence
(if applicable).
•
Demographic Information: As noted in 3.1.
3.4. Procedure:
Participants would be informed they are participating in
a study about legal decision-making. After providing
informed consent, they would be randomly assigned to
one of the two prosecutor gender conditions. They
would then review the case vignette and the
prosecutor's closing argument. Following this, they
would
complete
the
dependent
measures
questionnaire. The entire process would be conducted
online or in a controlled laboratory setting.
3.5. Data Analysis:
Quantitative data would be analyzed using statistical
software (e.g., SPSS, R).
•
Descriptive
Statistics:
Means,
standard
deviations, and frequencies for all variables.
•
Inferential Statistics:
•
Independent Samples t-test: To compare
perceived defendant culpability scores between
the male and female prosecutor conditions.
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
5
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
•
ANOVA/ANCOVA: To examine the main effect of
prosecutor gender and potential interactions
with participant gender or other demographic
variables (e.g., political ideology) on culpability
perceptions.
•
Mediation Analysis: To explore whether
prosecutor credibility mediates the relationship
between prosecutor gender and perceived
defendant culpability.
4. RESULTS
(This section presents hypothetical results based on the
proposed methodology and drawing upon the
theoretical frameworks discussed in the literature
review, particularly role congruity theory and gender
stereotypes in professional contexts.)
The hypothetical experimental study investigating the
influence of prosecutor gender on perceptions of
defendant culpability would likely yield the following key
findings:
4.1. Overall Perceptions of Culpability:
The mean perceived defendant culpability scores would
vary across the two prosecutor gender conditions.
Specifically, participants exposed to the female
prosecutor condition would likely assign a slightly lower
mean culpability score to the defendant compared to
those in the male prosecutor condition. While the
difference might not always be statistically significant in
every iteration, a trend would be observed.
4.2. Impact on Prosecutor Credibility:
A more pronounced and statistically significant
difference would likely be observed in the perceived
credibility of the prosecutor. The female prosecutor
might be rated lower on agentic traits (e.g.,
assertiveness, forcefulness, perceived competence in a
"tough" role) compared to the male prosecutor, despite
delivering the identical scripted argument. Conversely,
the female prosecutor might be rated higher on
communal traits (e.g., empathy, approachability), which
may be seen as less congruent with the traditional
prosecutorial role. This would align with role congruity
theory [17, 18].
4.3. Interaction with Participant Gender:
A significant interaction effect between prosecutor
gender and participant gender might be observed.
•
Female Participants: Female mock jurors might
show less of a difference in culpability perceptions
between male and female prosecutors, or might
even rate female prosecutors as equally or more
credible, potentially due to shared gender identity
or different evaluative criteria.
•
Male Participants: Male mock jurors might exhibit a
more pronounced tendency to assign lower
culpability to defendants when presented by a
female prosecutor, possibly reflecting stronger
adherence to traditional gender stereotypes
regarding authority and assertiveness in legal roles.
4.4. Mediation by Credibility:
Mediation analysis would likely reveal that prosecutor
credibility partially mediates the relationship between
prosecutor gender and perceived defendant culpability.
That is, the prosecutor's gender influences their
perceived
credibility
(particularly
on
agentic
dimensions), and this perceived credibility, in turn,
influences how culpable the mock jurors perceive the
defendant to be. A lower perceived agentic credibility
for female prosecutors might subtly weaken the
perceived strength of the prosecution's case, leading to
slightly lower culpability ratings for the defendant.
4.5. Sentencing Recommendations:
Consistent with culpability perceptions, participants in
the female prosecutor condition might also recommend
slightly lighter sentences for the defendant, though this
effect might be less robust than the culpability
perception itself.
These hypothetical results suggest that while the direct
impact of prosecutor gender on defendant culpability
perceptions might be subtle, it is likely mediated by how
the prosecutor's credibility and effectiveness are
perceived through the lens of gender stereotypes and
role congruity.
5. DISCUSSION
The hypothetical findings from this experimental study
underscore the subtle yet potentially significant
influence of prosecutor gender on perceptions of
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
6
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
defendant culpability. The observed trend of lower
culpability ratings for defendants prosecuted by female
attorneys, mediated by perceived credibility, aligns
strongly with Role Congruity Theory [17, 18, 25]. This
theory posits that individuals in roles traditionally
associated with one gender (e.g., the assertive, agentic
role of a prosecutor often linked to masculinity) may
face prejudice or altered perceptions if they are of the
incongruent gender. Female prosecutors, despite
delivering identical arguments, might be perceived as
less "forceful" or "authoritative" (agentic traits) by mock
jurors, which could subtly undermine the perceived
strength of the prosecution's case and, consequently,
reduce the attributed culpability of the defendant.
The interaction effect with participant gender is
particularly insightful. If male participants show a
stronger tendency to assign lower culpability with
female prosecutors, it could suggest a more rigid
adherence to traditional gender stereotypes among this
demographic, or a greater sensitivity to perceived
deviations from expected gender roles in positions of
authority. Conversely, if female participants show less
bias, it might reflect a greater awareness of gender
issues or a different set of evaluative criteria. This
highlights the complex interplay of both the actor's
gender and the observer's gender in shaping perceptions
within the legal arena.
These results have critical implications for the
administration of justice. If a prosecutor's gender, rather
than solely the evidence, can subtly influence
perceptions of guilt, it introduces a potential source of
bias into the system. This bias could impact plea
bargaining outcomes, as defense attorneys might
strategically approach negotiations differently based on
the prosecutor's gender, or even influence jury
deliberations. The immense power of prosecutors [11]
means that even subtle biases in perception could have
far-reaching consequences for defendants.
Furthermore, these findings speak to the ongoing
challenges faced by women in traditionally male-
dominated
professions.
Despite
increasing
representation in law [2] and judiciary [19], female legal
professionals may still encounter implicit biases that
affect their perceived effectiveness and career
progression. This underscores the need for:
•
Awareness
and
Training:
Educating
legal
professionals (including judges, jurors, and other
attorneys) about implicit gender biases and their
potential impact on perceptions.
•
Professional Development: Supporting female
prosecutors in developing strategies to navigate role
incongruity and enhance their perceived credibility
without compromising their authentic professional
style. This might involve focusing on persuasive
communication
techniques
that
transcend
traditional gender stereotypes.
•
Further Research: Investigating whether these
effects vary by case type (e.g., violent crime vs.
white-collar crime), defendant gender, or the
specific cultural context of the jurisdiction.
Longitudinal studies could also explore the long-
term career impacts of these perceptions on female
prosecutors.
It is important to acknowledge the limitations of a mock
juror study. While experimental control is high, the
artificiality of the setting may not fully capture the
complexities of a real courtroom. Real jurors are
exposed to a broader range of stimuli, including live
testimony, cross-examination, and judicial instructions.
Future research could extend this inquiry to real-world
data, if ethically and practically feasible, or employ more
immersive simulation techniques.
In conclusion, the hypothetical findings suggest that
prosecutor gender can subtly influence perceptions of
defendant culpability, primarily through its impact on
perceived credibility. This highlights a nuanced form of
gendered injustice that warrants further investigation
and proactive measures to ensure that justice is
administered fairly, regardless of the gender of those
who seek it.
6. CONCLUSION
The US criminal justice system, while striving for
impartiality, remains susceptible to subtle biases that
can influence perceptions of defendant culpability. This
article has explored the compelling, yet under-
researched, hypothesis that the gender of a prosecutor
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
7
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
can influence how mock jurors perceive a defendant's
guilt.
Drawing
upon
established
theories
of
prosecutorial power, culpability perception, and gender
role congruity, we have highlighted the potential for
female prosecutors to face unique challenges in terms of
perceived credibility, which could, in turn, subtly impact
the perceived culpability of the defendants they
prosecute.
The hypothetical experimental results suggest that while
the direct impact on culpability may be subtle, it is likely
mediated by how a prosecutor's credibility is perceived
through the lens of gender stereotypes. This
underscores a nuanced form of gender dynamics within
the courtroom that warrants significant attention.
Recognizing and addressing these implicit biases is
crucial for fostering a truly equitable legal system.
Future research should aim to further validate these
findings in diverse contexts and explore strategies to
mitigate such biases, ensuring that justice is served
based on evidence and law, free from the influence of
gendered perceptions.
REFERENCES
[1] Alschuler, A. W. (1976). The Trial Judge’s Role in Plea
Bargaining, Part I. Columbia Law Review, 76, 1059-1154.
https://doi.org/10.2307/1121673
[2] American Bar Association. (2022). ABA profile of the
legal
profession.
https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/admi
nistrative/news/2022/07/profile-report-2022.pdf
[3] Barron, L. A. (2003). Ask and you shall Receive?
Gender Differences in Negotiators’ Beliefs about
Requests for a Higher Salary. Human Relations (New
York),
56(6),
635
–
662.
https://doi.org/10.1177/00187267030566001
[4] Beckett, K., & Sasson, T. (2000). The war on crime as
hegemonic strategy: A neo-Marxian theory of the new
punitiveness in US criminal justice policy. In Of crime &
criminality: The use of theory in everyday life (pp. 61-
84). SAGE Publications, Inc.
[5] Berman, G. L., Narby, D. J., & Cutler, B. L. (1995).
Effects of inconsistent eyewitness statements on mock-
jurors' evaluations of the eyewitness, perceptions of
defendant culpability and verdicts. Law & Human
Behavior,
19,
79
–
88.
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01499074
[6] Bibas, S. (2009). Prosecutorial regulation versus
prosecutorial accountability. University of Pennsylvania
Law
Review,
154(4),
959
–
1016.
https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/faculty_scholarship
/244
[7] Blank Law. (2022). Why hire a female criminal
defense
lawyer
for
sex
crime
cases.
https://nicoleblankbecker.com/why-hire-a-female-
criminal-defense-lawyer-for-sex-crime-
cases/#:~:text=Many%20psychological%20studies%20h
ave%20shown,may%20not%20be%20able%20to
[8] Bowles, H. R., & McGinn, K. L. (2005). Claiming
authority: Negotiating challenges for women leaders.
The psychology of leadership: New perspectives and
research,
191-208.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410611406-16
[9] Bresler, K. (1996). “I never lost a trial”: When
prosecutors keep score of criminal convictions.
Georgetown Journal of Legal Ethics, 9(2), 537
–
546.
http://hdl.handle.net/10822/898654
[10] Brooklyn Defender Services. (2018). In defense of
power
of
prosecutors.
https://indefenseof.us/issues/prosecuted
[11] Burke, A. S. (2006). Improving prosecutorial
decision making: some lessons of cognitive science.
William and Mary Law Review, 47(5), 1587
–
1634.
https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?ar
ticle=1232&context=wmlr
[12] Claessens, S., Fischer, K., Chaudhuri, A., Sibley, C. G.,
& Atkinson, Q. D. (2020). The dual evolutionary
foundations of political ideology. Nature Human
Behaviour,
4(4),
336
–
345.
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-020-0850-9
[13] Davis, A. J. (2007). Arbitrary justice: The power of
the American prosecutor. Oxford University Press.
[14] Dervan, L. E., and V. A. Edkins. 2013. “The Innocent
Defendant’s Dilemma: An Innovative Empirical Study of
Plea Bargaining’s Innocence Problem.” Journal of
Criminal
Law
&
Criminology
103(1):
1
–
48.
https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2071397
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
8
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
[15] Devers, L. (2011). Plea and charge bargaining:
Research summary. United States Department of
Justice,
Bureau
of
Justice
Assistance.
https://bja.ojp.gov/sites/g/files/xyckuh186/files/media
/document/pleabargainingresearchsummary.pdf
[16] Dolan, K. (2010). The impact of gender stereotyped
evaluations on support for women candidates. Political
Behavior, 32, 69
–
88. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-
009-9090-4
[17] Eagly, A. H. (2004). Few women at the top: How role
incongruity produces prejudice and the glass ceiling. In
D. van Knippenberg & M. A. Hogg (Eds.), Leadership and
power: Identity processes in groups and organizations
(pp.
79
–
93).
Sage.
https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446216170.n7
[18] Eagly, A. H., & Karau, S. J. (2002). Role congruity
theory of prejudice toward female leaders. Psychological
Review,
109(3),
573
–
598.
https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0033-
295X.109.3.573
[19] Flanagan, T. J., McGarrell, E. F., & Brown, E. J.
(1985). Public perceptions of the criminal courts: The
role of demographic and related attitudinal variables.
Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 22(1), 66
–
82. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022427885022001004
[20] Fox, B., Moule, R. K., Jaynes, C. M., & Parry, M. M.
(2021). Are the Effects of Legitimacy and Its Components
Invariant? Operationalization and the Generality of
Sunshine and Tyler’s Empowerment Hypothesis. The
Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 58(1), 3
–
40. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022427820926228
[21] Francis, L. J. (1997). The psychology of gender
differences in religion: A review of empirical research.
Religion,
27(1),
81
–
96.
https://doi.org/10.1006/reli.1996.0066
[22] Frazier, A., and J. E. Gonzales. 2021. “Studying
Sequential Processes of Criminal Defendant Decision-
Making Using a Choose-Your-Own-Adventure Research
Paradigm.” Psychology, Crime & Law 28(9): 883–
910.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2021.1972107
[23] Funk, K. D. (2019). If the shoe fits: Gender role
congruity and evaluations of public managers. Journal of
Behavioral
Public
Administration,
2(1),
1
–
10.
http://dx.doi.org/10.30636/jbpa.21.48
[24] Garcia-Retamero, R., & López-Zafra, E. (2006).
Prejudice
against
women
in
male-congenial
environments: Perceptions of gender role congruity in
leadership.
Sex
Roles,
55,
51
–
61.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-006-9068-1
[25] Hahn, P.W., & Clayton, S.D. (1996). The effects of
attorney presentation style, attorney gender, and juror
gender on juror decisions. Law and Human Behavior,
20(5), 533
–
554. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01499040
[26] Hellgren, J., & Kassin, S. M. (2022). The defense
lawyer’s plea recommendation: Disentangling the
influences of perceived guilt and probability of
conviction. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 28(4),
546
–
559. https://doi.org/10.1037/law0000365
[27] Hodgson, S. & Pryor, B. (1984). Sex discrimination in
the courtroom: Attorney’s gender and credibility.
Psychological
Reports,
55(2),
483
–
486.
https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1984.55.2.483
[28] Hong, A. P. C. I., & van der Wijst, P. J. (2013).
Women in negotiation: Effects of gender and power on
negotiation behavior. Negotiation and Conflict
Management
Research,
6(4),
273
–
284.
https://doi.org/10.1111/ncmr.12022
[29] Hurwitz, M. S., & Lanier, D. N. (2008). Diversity in
state and federal appellate courts: Change and
continuity across 20 years. Justice System Journal, 29(1),
47
–
70.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0098261X.2008.10767870
