This research provided the first empirical test of the hypothesis that stereotypes bias evaluations of forensic evidence. A pilot study (N = 107) assessed the content and consensus of 20 criminal stereotypes by identifying perpetrator characteristics (e.g., sex, race, age, religion) that are stereotypically associated with specific crimes. In the main experiment (N = 225), participants read a mock police incident report involving either a stereotyped crime (child molestation) or a nonstereotyped crime (identity theft) and judged whether a suspect’s fingerprint matched a fingerprint recovered at the crime scene. Accompanying the suspect’s fingerprint was personal information about the suspect of the type that is routinely available to fingerprint analysts (e.g., race, sex) and which could activate a stereotype. Participants most often perceived the fingerprints to match when the suspect fit the criminal stereotype, even though the prints did not actually match. Moreover, participants appeared to be unaware of the extent to which a criminal stereotype had biased their evaluations. These findings demonstrate that criminal stereotypes are a potential source of bias in forensic evidence analysis and suggest that suspects who fit criminal stereotypes may be disadvantaged over the course of the criminal justice process.

In 2004, Oregon lawyer Brandon Mayfield was falsely arrested and detained by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) after his fingerprints were mistakenly matched to a fingerprint recovered on a bag of detonators near the site of the Madrid commuter train bombings. In the wake of this high profile error, many people wondered whether Mayfield’s personal characteristics might have played a role in the misidentification. Mayfield had recently converted to Islam, was married to an Egyptian immigrant, and had once been an attorney...