Exploring potential impact of belief in rape myths on (mock) juror decision making in Northern Ireland

Abstract

This thesis examined individual reasoning and verdict choices of members of the Northern Ireland public eligible for jury service regarding two versions of a hypothetical rape trial scenario. The online study elicited a combination of Likert scale, qualitative and binary verdict responses to a series of questions on two vignettes, identical but for facts pertaining to three common rape myths concerning complainant and defendant alcohol consumption, complainant struggle and injury and complainant reporting to police, all of which were accentuated in the second vignette. Participants were not informed the researcher was testing how rape myth belief impacted responses and verdict choices. The researcher then conducted situational and socio-demographic data analysis. While considerably more participants found the defendant not guilty in the second vignette, in which the three myths under investigation were accentuated, the researcher also found stark gender differences between male and female responses; far more men than women endorsed rape myths and used these to justify acquittal. Age and educational attainment did not appear to significantly affect responses. However, many participants had difficulty applying the legal concepts of consent, reasonable belief in consent and the standard of proof required for a criminal conviction.

Thesis is embargoed until 31 July 2029.

Date of Award	Jul 2024
Original language	English
Awarding Institution	Queen's University Belfast
Sponsors	Northern Ireland and North East (NINE) ESRC Doctoral Training Centre
Supervisor	Yassin Brunger (Supervisor) & Thérèse Murphy (Supervisor)