Nav: Home

Women who wear Muslim garments in court are viewed as more credible witnesses

February 01, 2019

Sexual assault victims wearing the hijab or niqab are viewed more positively when testifying in court than uncovered women reveals a study.

Lead author, Weyam Fahmy of Memorial University, said that: "Our findings raise an interesting question about how trial fairness may be impacted by the greater levels of credibility afforded to victims who wear Muslim garments while testifying.

"Any decisions on policies or recommendations on the presence of the Muslim garments in court must be undergirded by a robust body of empirical data."

The study by Lancaster University in the UK and Memorial University of Newfoundland aimed to investigate the importance of being able to see the face to judge credibility among witnesses, along with the importance of religious garments.

Contrary to expectations, they found that "positive biases" are created when women testify in court with either their hair covered (the hijab) or their face and hair covered (the niqab).

Dr Kirk Luther of Lancaster University in the UK stated that "The effect of Muslim Garment on victim credibility ratings was significant; the victim was perceived as more credible when she wore a niqab or hijab compared to when she did not wear either of these garments."

The study involved four videos featuring an actress which were shown to participants; two videos where the woman wore either a niqab or hijab, a third where she wore a balaclava and the fourth where her face and hair were uncovered.

In all four videos, the woman wore a black long-sleeved dress.

In each video, a woman was filmed on the witness stand providing her testimony about a sexual assault she allegedly experienced. The script used in the video was taken from an anonymous transcript of an actual court case where a woman was allegedly sexually assaulted. The victim and event script remained the same in all four videos.

The highest rating for credibility was given to the women wearing the niqab, followed by the hijab, then the balaclava and lastly the women with no face or head covering who was judged the least credible.

Researchers say there are at least three plausible explanations for this bias:
  • The religious garments may signal that the wearer is more honest because of a positive view of religion
  • The Muslim garment may dispel the common rape myth that the sexual assault victim was "asking for it" because it represents sexually conservative attitudes that are thought to disapprove of pre-marital or casual sexual encounters
  • Muslim women, especially those who don a niqab or hijab, are often viewed as oppressed and are therefore can be seen as being more vulnerable to sexual abuse
Meagan McCardle of Memorial University noted: "Contrary to our prediction, participants rated victims wearing a Muslim garment as more credible than those who did not wear a Muslim garment. Also contrary to our prediction was the finding that covering the face fully did not have a significant effect on credibility ratings."

Professor Brent Snook concluded, "Our findings lead to the provisional conclusion that whether or not a sexual assault victim chooses to cover her face while testifying in court does not seem to have any effect on credibility ratings."
-end-


Lancaster University

Related Credibility Articles:

Voters agree with polls that favor their candidates
With the presidential election a year away, pollsters will barrage the country with poll questions to get the pulse of the voters about the candidates.
'Fake news' isn't easy to spot on Facebook, according to new study
With the presidential election season moving into high gear, campaign messaging will soon begin increasing dramatically.
Training for Title IX investigators lacks tested, effective techniques
Interviews are the central component of any Title IX investigation, but new research finds the techniques investigators are using may not be the most effective.
New science blooms after star researchers die, study finds
Deaths of prominent life scientists tend to be followed by a surge in highly cited research by newcomers.
Is that news really 'fake,' or is it just biased?
In an era of concern over 'fake news,' a new study finds that people draw a distinction between information sources that are dishonest and those that are biased.
U of Guelph study finds health professionals need to be cautious on social media
Posting a single negative comment to Facebook may hinder health professionals' credibility with current or potential patients, a new University of Guelph study reveals.
Reinvent Motherisk to protect mothers and babies
Canada should reinvent the Motherisk program to support pregnant women to have healthy babies, argues an editorial in CMAJ.
Researchers propose new federal rule of evidence for more accurate verdicts in court
While many juries use commonsense when determining an innocent or guilty verdict, research has shown that commonsense can be misleading and inaccurate.
Source credibility is key to derailing fake news
Fake news is a threat to American democratic institutions and false information can have far-reaching effects.
Study scrutinizes credibility of weight management blogs by most
Weight management discussions on social media are very influential. But a new study assessing the underlying nutrition and weight management information provided by key UK social media influencers suggests that their blogs are not credible/trustworthy sources of advice.
More Credibility News and Credibility Current Events

Top Science Podcasts

We have hand picked the top science podcasts of 2019.
Now Playing: TED Radio Hour

Accessing Better Health
Essential health care is a right, not a privilege ... or is it? This hour, TED speakers explore how we can give everyone access to a healthier way of life, despite who you are or where you live. Guests include physician Raj Panjabi, former NYC health commissioner Mary Bassett, researcher Michael Hendryx, and neuroscientist Rachel Wurzman.
Now Playing: Science for the People

#544 Prosperity Without Growth
The societies we live in are organised around growth, objects, and driving forward a constantly expanding economy as benchmarks of success and prosperity. But this growing consumption at all costs is at odds with our understanding of what our planet can support. How do we lower the environmental impact of economic activity? How do we redefine success and prosperity separate from GDP, which politicians and governments have focused on for decades? We speak with ecological economist Tim Jackson, Professor of Sustainable Development at the University of Surrey, Director of the Centre for the Understanding of Sustainable Propserity, and author of...
Now Playing: Radiolab

An Announcement from Radiolab