Body modifications in the form of tattoos have existed for centuries. Historically, perception regarding people with tattoos have been negative. These streams of implicit and explicit thoughts affect cognitive processes, often creating oversimplified ideas about a people with tattoos. Regardless of contradicting evidence, once negative beliefs are encoded in the brain, they are extremely difficult to restructure.

The purpose of this study was to determine whether attitudes and beliefs regarding visible tattoos influence potential juror decisions, specifically in terms of determination of blame and culpability. Data was collected from 268 participants who were randomly assigned to scenarios varying in presence of tattoos on the defendant, as well as the gender of the defendant.

Results presented no statistically significant differences in the assignment of criminal culpability between defendants without tattoos (m = 30.94) and those with visible tattoos (m = 30.23), t(266) = 1.48, p = 0.14. Correspondingly, no statistically significant differences between female (m = 29.86) and male defendants with visible tattoos (m = 30.70), t(126) = -1.36, p = 0.18 were found.

Statistically significant differences were discovered however, between blameworthiness (m = 30.23) and attractiveness, as well as exposure (m = 19.31), t(127) = 16.91, p < 0.05. In other words, participants with preconceived notions that tattooed people were attractive, as well as participants in close association with persons with visible tattoos, found tattooed defendants less likely to be criminally culpable compared to participants with no proximate interaction or appeal towards tattooed people.