LAUSR

Abstract Purpose Legal scholars have criticized the introduction of victim impact statement (VIS) delivery in criminal proceedings due to their potential of biasing legal decisions about guilt and sentencing. The purpose of this study was to review studies which tested the validity of this criticism. Methods Twenty-one databases were systematically searched to identify relevant studies. Studies were included in the review if they investigated the association between VIS delivery and legal decisions about guilt and/or sentencing and tested the significance of this association, either directly or indirectly through mediation or moderation by their factors. Data were synthesized in a narrative way using a predetermined procedure. Results Thirty-six studies were included in the review: thirty-one experimental studies and five criminal case files studies. Overall, these studies indicate that it is currently too early to draw any definite conclusions about the systematic impact of VIS delivery on these types of legal decisions and the mediating or moderating role of third factors. For example, the majority of the reviewed studies focused on the impact of VIS delivery on sentencing recommendations in American death penalty cases and therefore lack generalizability. Conclusions More research is necessary to gain a more thorough understanding of the impact of VIS delivery on legal decision making in criminal proceedings.