1. Effects of Physical Attractiveness on Evaluations of a Male Employee’s Allegation of Sexual Harassment by His Female Employer By Karl L. Wuensch & Charles H. Moore

2. Research Question & Hypothesis Research Question What effects of the sex of the juror and the physical attractiveness of the litigants where sexual harassment of a male employee by his female employer is occurring have on the outcome, or verdict? Hypothesis Guilty verdicts would be more likely when the defendant (female employer) was unattractive and when the plaintiff (male employee) was attractive.

3. Participants 324 total subjects –164 men –160 women All were enrolled in the undergraduate psychology classes at a southern college. Statistics 78% Caucasian 19% African American 3.5% Other (Native American, Asian American, Hispanic)

4. Procedures 1.Put into 10 groups of 40 individuals in each 2. Each was given a packet 3. Plaintiff gave his testimony 4.Defendant gave her testimony and denied all allegations 5.Given participant response forms 6.Asked to rate, on a 9-point scale certainty of guilt and the attractiveness of each litigant. 7.Jury asked for guilty or not guilty verdict

5. Variables of the Study Independent Variables –Sex of the participants Male or female –Physical attractiveness of plaintiff –Physical attractiveness of defendant 1=physically unattractive to 9=physically attractive Dependent Variables –The verdict guilty or not guilty –Participants own certainty of guilt or lack there of 9-point scale from “definitely not guilty” to “definitely guilty”

6. The Set-Up

7. Results Female jurors rendered a guilty verdict more often than males did Females: 74% Males: 66& When defendant was attractive and plaintiff not, female jurors gave out more verdicts (78%) compared to men (56%) Plaintiff was attractive and defendant was not, female jurors were more likely to render a guilty verdict (85%) compared to men (68%) Both unattractive, results were not very much different. (females 58%, males 63%) Both attractive, no difference at all (78%) “Only significant effect was that of the plaintiff attractiveness. With certainty of guilty being significantly greater when the plaintiff was attractive”

8. Limitations Limitation 1 –College students and actual jury selection Limitation 2 –Verdict of this study compared to that of an actual trial Limitation 3 –Predeliberation verdicts