Honesty, Nonverbal Behavior, and Indigenous Populations: A Comparison of Australian and American Judicial Considerations

• In Event: Qualitative Research on Psychology and Decision-making in Courts

Abstract

Sentencing may be influenced by judicial considerations of the defendant’s honesty–and how a judge determines honesty may directly relate to interpretations of the defendant’s behavior. However, nonverbal communication is not interculturally consistent, and nonverbal behavior may be inconsistently interpreted across cultures. According to the Shannon-Weaver Model of Communication, a defendant must encode and communicate messages for a judge to decode and interpret them. However, channels of communication or noise of the environment may also distort messages. Thus, the defendant’s intents and messages may not be properly understood due to factors like nonverbal behavior. Indeed, judges may or may not consider that factors such as anxiety, nervousness, and/or upbringing and socialization may influence how the defendant behaves. Building on these ideas, this study analyzes interviews with 45 judges in the U.S. and Australia to explore differences in cultural considerations of nonverbal behavior, particularly for aboriginal Indigenous populations.

Authors

• Madison Baczuk, Rutgers University School of Criminal Justice

• Colleen Berryessa, Rutgers University

• Carolina R. Caliman, Rutgers University School of Criminal Justice

• Melissa de Vel-Palumbo, Flinders University