APS

2025 APS Annual Convention · 2025

Deadly Confusion: Mitigator Strength Ratings Depend on What Mitigator Example Is Provided

Washington, DC · May 2025

Poster · Cognitive

  • Kenzie Tart
    University of North Carolina Wilmington
  • Madilyn Brown
    University of North Carolina Wilmington
  • Emilie Burton
    University of North Carolina Wilmington
  • Sophie Palermo
    University of North Carolina Wilmington
  • Grace Daniel
    University of North Carolina Wilmington
  • Alia Jones
    University of North Carolina Wilmington
  • Ryan Lillis
    University of North Carolina Wilmington
  • Abigail Deuschle
    University of North Carolina Wilmington
  • Sadie Peters
    University of North Carolina Wilmington
  • Christobel Martin
    University of North Carolina Wilmington
  • Kylie Quann
    University of North Carolina Wilmington
  • Megan Clardy
    University of North Carolina Wilmington
  • Reid Copeland
    University of North Carolina Wilmington
  • Bryan Myers
    The University of North Carolina at Wilmington

Abstract

Participants read a definition of mitigation that varied the example (no example, defendant mental state, defendant character) and then rated the strength of mental state and character mitigators. Mental state mitigators were rated as stronger than defendant character in the control and mental state conditions but not the character condition.

Decision Making

← Poster Session IV