Can You “See” Criminal Intent? What Research Reveals
How perceiver bias impacts perception in the criminal justice system
Posted April 22, 2026 | Reviewed by Davia Sills
As a career prosecutor, I have heard it for decades from the jury box as both sides attempt to select a fair and impartial jury: “He looks guilty.” Or upon hearing the charges, “I knew it! He definitely looks like a (fill in the blank).” Statements like these are distinct from assumptions about police procedure, such as the belief that anyone who has been arrested “must be guilty of something.” Conclusions based upon appearances alone before a single piece of evidence has been introduced in court indicate potential predisposition and bias , and are deeply concerning for everyone involved.
Determining When Looks Can Kill
Beth B. Stevens and Heather Kleider-Offutt (2026), in a piece aptly entitled “When Looks Could Kill,” examined the role of suspect appearance in legal outcomes.[i] Investigating the impact of “criminal appearance” and defendant remorse on criminal penalties and leniency, they found that the facial structure of some defendants can prompt biases in parole decisions and beliefs about recidivism.
Stevens and Kleider-Offutt recognize that upon viewing a face, perceivers form first impressions within 500–1,000 milliseconds, often based on facial cues alone. These inferences remain stable over time, often becoming more negative, particularly with faces that are unfamiliar. They note that these types of judgments can influence decisions about the person viewed, as indicated by research about death row sentencing (citing Wilson & Rule, 2015), showing that inmates who were perceived as less trustworthy were more likely to be sentenced to death, even when they were subsequently exonerated.
Stevens and Kleider-Offutt note that the so-called “criminal face effect” indicates that criminal-looking faces have smaller eyes, lowered eyebrows, more prominent chins, and darker skin pigmentation (citing Funk et al., 2017). They acknowledge this bias can impact outcomes in court, as defendants who possess facial features that match stereotypes related to their crime are more likely to be found guilty and receive harsher sentences.
Stevens and Kleider-Offutt also note that feature-based perceptions of higher criminality are linked to other forms of negative stereotyping, including harsher sentencing and eyewitness misidentification, and that faces that have been rated higher in “criminal appearance” are more likely to be identified in a police lineup, regardless of whether or not the suspect actually committed the crime.
Criminal Intent Versus Remorse
In two studies they conducted, Stevens and Kleider-Offutt discovered that perceptions of criminality and remorse depend on the intensity of defendant facial features, and that offenders with “criminal-looking” features can still appear to be remorseful, although they note that this perception may be dependent on what type of crime was committed as well as the type of judgment that is being made, such as predictions of re-offense or decisions about parole. They used faces of young white males in their study in an attempt to isolate remorseful and criminal face-type effects from the influence of race, age, and gender , although they note that prior research has found a link between these characteristics and negative courtroom biases that influence decision-making .
Stevens and Kleider-Offutt found an association between facial features and perceived outcomes in the criminal justice system. In their first study, participants looked at pictures of faces that varied in the intensity of features indicating criminal disposition or remorse. In the second study, participants viewed pictures of faces that combined both types of features and were paired with information about the type of crime committed. In both studies, participants indicated how likely they would be to grant parole, and how likely they believed it was that the person would commit a similar crime in the future.
Results demonstrated that the intensity of facial features influenced both outcomes. Stevens and Kleider-Offutt reported that participants judged faces with stronger criminal features as less likely to receive parole and more likely to continue to commit crimes. Remorseful features produced the opposite effect. Regarding the combination of both expressions, they found that offenders who were criminal-looking could also appear to be remorseful, but this perception was dependent on the type of crime committed as well as the judgment participants were asked to make: predictions about re-offense or decisions about suitability for parole.
More Than Meets the Eye
Although the research by Stevens and Kleider-Offutt produced a variety of results based on the interactions between facial features and knowledge of criminal backgrounds, the impact of looks alone upon judgment and decision-making is significant. Whether within the criminal justice system or in other aspects of life, recognizing the tendency to jump to conclusions based on limited information can increase awareness of the necessity to obtain as much information as possible before arriving at preconceived notions about other people that could impact their lives, as well as our own.
[i] Stevens, Beth B., and Heather Kleider-Offutt. “When Looks Could Kill … or Set You Free: The Role of Appearance in Legal Decisions.” Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition , March 19, 2026.
Share this post Facebook Bluesky Linkedin Email
There was a problem adding your email address. Please try again.
By submitting your information you agree to the Psychology Today Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy
Wendy L. Patrick, J.D., Ph.D., is a career trial attorney, behavioral analyst, author of Why Bad Looks Good , Red Flags , and co-author of the revised New York Times bestseller Reading People .
Get the help you need from a therapist near you–a FREE service from Psychology Today.
This article is part of the Bringwise Psychology Journal — daily insights on human behavior, mental health, and personal growth.