2026/02/09 by Kurt Gray, H. Devine, Emily Kubin · 1 voice
Psychology · Social Sciences · #Deception detection and forensic psychology #Forgiveness and Related Behaviors #Jury Decision Making Processes
paper · doi:10.1177/23727322251405850
openalex publication_date 2026/02/09 · openalex created_date 2026/02/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/05/21
Questions of legal blame and punishment hinge on judgments of victimhood: who is a victim and who is a victimizer? The law presumes that we judge victimhood objectively, but science shows that victimhood relies more on biased perceptions than impartial facts. The disconnect between victimhood in the law versus victimhood in our minds undermines the quest for justice. Here, we review three key psychological principles of victimhood and how they cause trouble in the judicial system. We then propose solutions to these challenges. Principle One: Victimhood is subjective—legal judgments hinge on who seems like a victim in our minds. Principle Two: Victimhood is stereotypical—who seems like a victim is biased , with people easily accepting the victimization of the vulnerable (e.g., children) but not the more powerful (e.g., strong men). Principle Three: Victimhood is sticky—once we identify the victim (or victimizer) in a situation, it is hard to change our minds. When the law fails to appreciate these principles, it causes distrust of verdicts, denials of true suffering, and continued condemnation of the exonerated. Potential solutions for these issues includes victim impact statements, restorative justice, and acknowledgments of legal errors. Understanding the true nature of victimhood is essential for a fair legal system.