A carregar...
Publicação
Gender and judicial decision-making: A systematic review of how gendered narratives shape judicial reasoning
| Nome: | Descrição: | Tamanho: | Formato: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5.92 MB | Adobe PDF |
Orientador(es)
Resumo(s)
Gendered assumptions within judicial reasoning shape how cases of
sexual violence (SV) are interpreted, prosecuted, and adjudicated. This
systematic review synthesizes empirical evidence on how gender
stereotypes and cultural myths influence judicial and prosecutorial
perceptions of adult female victims, primarily in SV cases, with limited
evidence from intimate partner violence (IPV). Twenty-eight studies,
with judges, prosecutors, and jury eligible mock jurors’ samples were
identified across five databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Medline,
PsycINFO, and SCOPUS), following PRISMA guidelines. Findings suggest
that gender stereotypes function as heuristic frameworks shaping
the construction and discounting of victim credibility, the interpretation
of evidence, and the attribution of responsibility. These patterns
were most consistently observed in SV contexts, where deviations
from the “ideal victim” stereotype were associated with increased
victim-blaming and reduced case progression. Evidence from IPV studies,
although limited, suggests distinct credibility dynamics linked to
ongoing relational contexts. The review highlights the persistence of
gendered biases across decision-maker types and study designs.
Conclusions are therefore tempered by the heterogeneity of the evidence
base and the predominance of SV research. The findings support
the need for structural, procedural, and training-based
interventions to reduce bias and promote more equitable judicial
outcomes.
Descrição
Palavras-chave
Gender-based violence Judicial bias Stereotypes Victim-blaming Judges Prosecutors Jury-eligiblemocks
Contexto Educativo
Citação
Pereira, B., Sousa, M., & De Castro Rodrigues, A. (2026). Gender and Judicial Decision-Making: A systematic review of how gendered narratives shape judicial reasoning. Victims & Offenders, 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/15564886.2026.2680008
Editora
Informa UK Limited