Abstract
The current study examined how the context of the crime and the ethnic affiliations of the suspects and participants influenced credibility assessments with respect to in- and out-group suspects. The 200 participants, half Israeli-Jewish and half Israeli-Arab, assessed the credibility of an alibi statement provided be either an Israeli-Jewish or an Israeli-Arab suspect accused of vandalism in either an ethnic-based or neutral-based context. The results indicate that the context of the crime moderated the effect of intergroup bias on credibility assessment among Israeli-Arab participants (out-group members). Under both crime contexts, Israeli-Jewish suspects were perceived as less credible than Israeli-Arab suspects. However, for Israeli-Arab, the effect of intergroup bias was stronger in the ethnic-based context than in the neutral-based context. Overall, the results suggest that Israeli-Arab group might have felt threatened by the ethnic-based context, which could have increased the group bias in their judgments, as compared to the Israeli-Jewish group.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 454-469 |
Number of pages | 16 |
Journal | Psychology, Crime and Law |
Volume | 28 |
Issue number | 5 |
Early online date | 2 Apr 2021 |
DOIs | |
State | Published - 2022 |
Bibliographical note
Publisher Copyright:© 2021 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
Funding
This paper is based on a dissertation written by the first author, submitted to Bar-Ilan University in partial fulfillment of the requirements toward the Ph.D. degree.
Keywords
- Crime context
- alibi
- credibility assessment
- intergroup bias
- social identity theory