Credibility assessments of alibi accounts: the role of cultural intergroup bias

Nir Rozmann, Galit Nahari

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Research has shown that judges and jurors are influenced by suspect ethnicity and that they might discriminate against out-group suspects in making decisions. This study examined the tendency to favor in-group members, as predicted by social identity theory, in assessing alibi credibility. Forty Israeli-Jewish and 40 Israeli-Arab participants assessed the credibility of an alibi statement provided by a suspect who was either Israeli-Jewish or Israeli-Arab. Findings show that participants were more likely to believe the alibi when it was provided by an in-group suspect than by an out-group suspect, supporting intergroup bias in alibi credibility assessments. Practical and theoretical implications are discussed.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)535-548
Number of pages14
JournalPsychiatry, Psychology and Law
Volume29
Issue number4
Early online date19 Jul 2021
DOIs
StatePublished - 2022

Keywords

  • SIT
  • alibi evaluation
  • credibility assessment
  • deception detection
  • intergroup bias
  • social identity theory

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Psychiatry and Mental health
  • Law
  • Psychology (miscellaneous)
  • Pathology and Forensic Medicine

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Credibility assessments of alibi accounts: the role of cultural intergroup bias'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this