Proving Love or Instilling Fear? Gender Differences in Perceptions and Jury Deliberations of Stalking among College Students

Abstract

We examined how college students perceived and discussed an intimate partner stalking case during mock jury deliberations. Specifically, undergraduates constituting 22 mixed-gender mock juries provided individual pre- and postdeliberation verdicts and deliberated in mixed-gender groups. We used Pathfinder analyses to derive semantic networks from their written pre- and postdeliberation verdict reasoning and the transcribed jury deliberations. During deliberations, women primarily made pro-alleged victim and antidefendant comments, considering the alleged victim’s fear and the defendant’s capability of harm. Men mainly made prodefendant comments, such as romanticizing his behavior. After deliberations, women became more prodefendant in their verdict reasons, while men remained similarly prodefendant and sometimes anti-alleged victim pre- and postdeliberations. Results provide evidence for gendered perceptions of criminal stalking, particularly pertaining to defendant threat and alleged victim fear. We consider implications for stalking legislation and education, and legal decision-making.