This paper examines the function of grammar and pragmatics in testimonies and cross-examinations, specifically in sexual assault cases in the United States. Past research demonstrates a society’s view of sexual assault, particularly as a means of control, is reflected in cross-examination methodologies, which propagates into the laws surrounding sexual assault. This aims to investigate the impact the shift in societal perspective on sexual assault has on the cross-examination methodologies and ultimately the laws surrounding sexual assault in the United States. The incorporation of Conversation Analysis (CA) is used as a framework to evaluate the court transcripts. The framework is coupled with guidelines previously used to examine sexual assault cross-examinations in other countries. It is imperative to apply this to the United States as the view on sexual assault differs. The cross-examination and testimony transcripts in three court cases are examined. The guidelines for grammar include transitivity, use of adverbials and modals, nominalizations and subjects of unaccusatives, while the pragmatics focus on strategic questioning, presupposition, and selective reformulation. The findings in this qualitative study demonstrate the lack of progress the United States judicial system has made in terms of sexual assault. While the societal perspective shifts, the cross-examination methodology and the language of the laws remain constant, despite increase in awareness and supporting Acts. Given the small scope of research conducted in the United States, more research is necessary, along with reformation of the court proceedings and laws surrounding sexual assault.

Several states within the United States have recently passed the Victim Life Photo Act, which allows prosecutors to present photographs of alleged murder victims when they were alive during the guilt phase of a trial. Critics argue that these photographs do not offer any relevant information about the crime or the defendant’s potential guilt and might bias jurors to vote guilty based on their sympathy for the victim—perhaps disproportionally so for high-status victims. Two mock trial experiments tested whether online participants who viewed alleged murder victim photographs would convict more because they increase anger, disgust, fear, sadness, and/or sympathy. Mock jurors who saw photographs of White (but not racial minority) victims while they were alive reported more sympathy for the victim relative to those who saw the same evidence without a photograph of the living victim—but the sympathy did not increase convictions (Study 1). Study 2 extended this study by testing whether the living victim photographs are more impactful in conjunction with seeing gruesome photographs of the victim after her death, creating a particularly disturbing contrast effect versus seeing the living photograph alone. Study 2 found that (a) living victim photographs on their own again had no effect on participants’ verdicts, (b) gruesome photographs on their own increased convictions through increased disgust, and (c) participants who saw both living and gruesome murder victim photographs (versus gruesome alone) were more conviction prone due to increased anger and sympathy. These studies inform current debates regarding the controversial Victim Life Photo Act: Admitting living victim photographs during the guilt phase—if presented along with gruesome photographs—can make jurors more sympathetic and angry, which can increase convictions.

Individuals are often susceptible to bias in their given fields; however, they may not acknowledge nor be aware of this phenomenon. Moreover, people typically can recognize bias in others yet fail to realize that they themselves are susceptible to their own bias. This is referred to as the bias blind spot, an unconscious meta-cognitive bias. Unconscious bias can lead to impaired decisions and can cause problems in the field, especially if professionals are defensive about bias mitigation procedures if they see them as unnecessary and threatening. The purpose of this thesis is to analyze and examine the perceptions that professional forensic psychologists have about bias in themselves and bias in their colleagues. Eighty-four professional forensic psychologists were surveyed and asked about their perception of bias in themselves, their colleagues, an average adult, and experts in another domain: forensic science. For this study, these forensic psychologists were asked to predict the bias that they themselves might have in their judgment, that forensic scientists might have in their judgment, and that the average adult would have. As hypothesized, and consistent with the bias blind spot, professional forensic psychologists rated their peers in the same field as having a higher amount of bias in their decisions than they themselves. Moreover, they also rated other professionals in similar fields (forensic science) as having a higher bias rate than themselves. In addition, participants rated bias mitigating procedures as being a higher threat to their field than a different domain (i.e., forensic science) – consistent with hypotheses. These results suggest that professional forensic psychologists are susceptible to the bias blind spot and its consequences.
Keywords: implicit bias, bias blind spot, perceptions, judgment, mitigating procedures

Prior research suggests that people ignore evidence that is inconsistent with what they want to believe. However, this research on motivated reasoning has focused on how people reason about familiar topics and in situations where the evidence presented interacts with strongly-held prior beliefs (e.g., the effectiveness of the death penalty as a crime deterrent). This makes it difficult to objectively assess how biased people are in motivated-reasoning contexts. Indeed, recent work by Jern and colleagues (2014) suggests that apparent instances of motivated reasoning may actually be instances of rational belief-updating. Inspired by this new account, the current studies reexamined motivated reasoning using a controlled categorization task and tested whether people assimilate evidence differently when they are motivated to maintain a certain belief versus when they are not. Contrary to earlier research on motivated reasoning, six studies with children and adults (N = 1295) suggest that participants’ motivations did not affect their information search and their beliefs were driven primarily by the evidence, even when the evidence was incongruent with their motivations. This work provides initial evidence for the account proposed by Jern and colleagues.

Cultivation theory states that consuming television cultivates a social reality in the real world which aligns with the reality present in television. When the television show CSI was released, researchers studied a form of cultivation stemming from the show titled the "CSI Effect." One of the components of the CSI Effect is the tendency of those who watch CSI to be more likely to overestimate the presence of forensic evidence present in a trial and place more trust in such evidence. In recent years, several true crime documentaries that examined controversial cases have been released. In a similar vein of research conducted on CSI, the current study examines true crime documentaries and their possible impacts on viewers’ judgments and beliefs about the criminal justice system. In the current study, participants were provided with a mock case and asked about their perceptions of the case along with their viewership habits. While overall true crime documentary viewership did not influence judgments of evidence manipulation or perceptions of police, findings point to viewership of the targeted documentaries being associated with feelings of mistrust towards the criminal justice system overall, while the lesser-viewed documentaries correlated with judgments of strength and responsibility of the defendant in the case. One possible explanation is that individual characteristics may serve as the driving factor in how individuals choose what to watch when the popularity of the show is not as well-known.

The Arizona healthcare system is changing and although its effects can be seen in almost every realm of the medical field, psychiatry is a specialty that is still experiencing hardship. There are scarce resources available for the ever-growing and struggling patient pool, especially in rural areas and minority populations. A comorbid cycle of untreated psychiatric illness contributes to the burden on emergency department and primary care medicine, as well as homelessness, crime, and suicide within the state. Arizona currently has a dismal spot in the rankings for American states with appropriate access to psychiatric resources, leaving many who need treatment without it. Compared to states with similar populations who are at the top of these rankings, Arizona spends more government money for behavioral health services, indicating a disparity in productivity and questioning monetary waste. Demographic statistics and other relevant scientific literature reveals that Arizona's psychiatric system lacks appropriate structure, and is failing the mental health care system both in monetary and societal constructs. These issues highlight the need for remedies and identify areas for future reform. Recommendations on such reform include permanent change in legislation and department models to improve crisis ward work, communication and networking during transition of care, integration of and access to continuum of care, and community education. They also include creating incentive and certification programs within the state in order to increase the number of available providers, especially in rural areas. These recommendations are directed to specifically reduce the burden of mental illness on emergency medical services, increase productivity, and decrease chronic untreated mental disease and monetary waste.

People often rely on experts' opinions and knowledge to inform their own decisions. This can be problematic, as expertise does not necessarily protect one from bias, and increased experience does not always increase an experts' accuracy (Cassidy & Buede, 2009; Goldberg, 1968; Molins et al., 2008). The nature of task characteristics of expert domains is associated with experts' performance (Shanteau 1992). The purpose of this thesis is to examine how people perceive experts in different disciplines, and to explore the factors that affect perceptions of expert objectivity. Perceptions of objectivity in 26 expert domains were examined. As hypothesized, higher ratings of clear and immediate feedback available to experts were associated with higher ratings of objectivity. However, other indicators of higher domain validity were not recognized by laypeople, such as higher levels of training and education. Contrary to our hypotheses, higher levels of familiarity with experts in a given domain and more experiences of disagreement with experts in a given domain were not associated with perceptions of objectivity. These results suggest that laypeople can correctly identify some indicators of the validity of different expert domains, but they cannot identify others. These perceptions affect how objectivity is perceived.

Prior research has indicated an attractive-leniency bias for defendants in mock jury studies. However, in recent years there have been highly publicized trials of attractive women who also appear sexual, in which juror's judgements do not show support for the attractive-leniency bias. The opposite effect seems to be taking place. The present study is the first to test the Femme Fatale stereotype that seems to be producing harsher judgements of attractive and sexually appealing women who commit crime, and the interaction of the relationship to their victim. The present study conducted a 2 (Attractiveness) X 2 (Sexual Appearance) X 2 (Relationship) between subjects design. Researchers conducted an ANOVA on all variables. Results indicate that women who are perceived as more attractive and more sexual, are more likely to be found guilty of their crime.

Depression is a prominent world disorder. Many prior studies have examined the biological, cognitive, and social elements of depression; however, few studies attempt to examine what role culture plays in this disorder. If culture plays such a large role in human development, it only makes sense that it would have an impact on a society's depression experience. Furthermore, conformity has been found to play a large role in the behaviors and mood states of adolescents. If conformity holds such control within this population, it is likely that said conformity could be adapted to any decided behavior. Although there has been research conducted on depression, culture, and conformity separately, these concepts are not often looked at in unison. For this reason, the current thesis focuses on the interaction between depression, culture, and conformity by defining depression-culture and depression-conformity, examining the manifestation of these concepts within American society, and analyzing the effects of these concepts.