A comparison of students' and jury panelists' decision-making in split recovery cases

This study was designed to assess jury decision-making for 289 participants reading a medical malpractice vignette as a function of participant type (undergraduate students or jury panelists), punitive damage award apportionment (none, half, or all to the plaintiff), and compensation previously assigned to the plaintiff (low, medium, or high). We found several sample differences. Overall, jury panelists awarded more money for punitive damages. Jury panelists were also more affected by compensatory-relevant information when making punitive decisions, including assigning punitive damages and rating the fairness of the traditional apportionment scheme, where the plaintiff receives all of the money. Compared with students, more jury panelists were in favor of the plaintiff receiving the entire punitive award. Most students endorsed split recovery. The authors suggest that psycholegal research conducted solely with student samples, rather than community members, may misestimate the likely behavior of actual juries. The implications of the study for split recovery policy are also discussed.     

Plaintiff life-taking: the effect of mock juror attitudes toward suicide on assignment of negligence and damages in a civil suit

Social scientific and legal scholars have examined the potential of a variety of case-relevant biases to distort juror decision-making (inter alia, death penalty attitudes, attitudes toward corporations, attitudes toward physicians, etc.). However, previous research has yet to address empirically the impact of attitudes toward suicide on juror decision-making. This study sought to examine the impact of mock juror's attitudes toward, and experiences with, suicide on assignment of negligence and damages in a civil suit. While results suggest that mock juror attitudes toward suicide do not directly affect a juror's assignment of negligence or damage awards, they do suggest that jurors may be susceptible to a reactance effect. As a result, attorneys should exercise caution when considering whether to directly address issues of possible plaintiff suicide.     

The effects of jury size, evidence complexity, and note taking on jury process and performance in a civil trial

A total of 567 jury-eligible men and women who were assigned to 6- or 12-person juries saw a videotaped civil trial that contained either I or 4 plaintiffs. Half the juries took notes, whereas the remainder did not. Six-person juries that did not take notes awarded multiple plaintiffs the highest amounts of compensation. Six-person juries also gave the highest punitive damages when they did not take notes and judged multiple plaintiffs. The punitive awards of 6-person juries were highly variable compared with 12-person juries. Multiple plaintiffs also increased the unpredictability of jury punitive awards. Twelve-person juries deliberated longer, recalled more probative information, and relied less than 6-person juries on evaluative statements and nonprobative evidence. Limitations and implications are discussed.     

Vengeance: Effects of gender,age, and religious background

Vengeance can be commonly defined as the infliction of harm in return for perceived injury or insult or as simply getting back at another person. Three hundred fifty‐three participants responded to eight hypothetical scenarios that may elicit vengeful behavior in which the offending party was either a romantic partner, a friend, a coworker, or a stranger. Participants also completed a vengeance scale and a measure of biblical literalism. Participants were most vengeful toward coworkers and least vengeful toward romantic partners. Age, religious conservatism, and gender were significant predictors of attitudes toward vengeance. Although men were more likely than women to be accepting of vengeful attitudes as measured by the vengeance scale, only age was a significant predictor of behavior in the vengeance scenarios. The current research provides a basis for a systematic investigation of vengeance within the structure of human relationships and interactions. Aggr. Behav. 27:343–350, 2001. © 2001 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Matters of Life and Death: Justice in Judgments of Wrongful Death1

Two experiments investigated the influence of social categories on mock juror judgments of wrongful death compensatory damages. The research also examined whether these cues—decedent race, parental status, age, and socioeconomic status—differentially affected noneconomic and economic awards and, further, the extent to which jurors' distributive justice concerns could explain the findings. Results revealed a decedent's parental status to consistently impact noneconomic awards; whereas his parental status, age, and socioeconomic status all consistently affected economic awards. Decedent race did not inform participants' judgments. These results were in close alignment with the values participants expressed (Study 2) regarding the use of social categories in compensatory damage awards. Overall, the pattern of findings supports a distributive justice account.     

Effects of Photographic Evidence on Mock Juror Judgement1

Effects of three levels of photographic evidence (color, black & white, no photograph) on 144 female subjects' monetary awards to an injured plaintiff were investigated in a 3 × 2 × 3 factorial design. Also manipulated were two levels of the severity of the plaintiff's injury and three levels of defendant blame. As predicted, a significant three-way interaction was observed such that the magnitude of the difference in monetary damages awarded the more and less severely injured plaintiff was greatest in the presence of the color photograph depicting injuries and when defendant blame was high. An emotional arousal interpretation for the effects of photographic evidence is tentatively offered.     

Stigma against false confessors impacts post‐exoneration financial compensation

False confessors are stigmatized more than other exonerees. Traditional theories of stigma suggest that this difference may result from confessors being seen as more responsible for their own wrongful conviction. In the current study, we examined an important tangible consequence of stigma against false confessors—namely, that it might impede their ability to win financial restitution in post‐exoneration civil lawsuits. Mock jurors (N = 129), recruited online, read a case summary in which an exoneree is seeking damages after being wrongly convicted due to a false confession or eyewitness misidentification, which either did or did not result from police misconduct. When the exoneree falsely confessed in the absence of police misconduct, mock jurors rated him as most responsible for his own conviction and expressed the most doubt over his actual innocence. Contrary to legal criteria, they also awarded him smaller compensatory and punitive damage awards. Notably, the false confessor was seen as more responsible than the misidentified exoneree even if his interrogation was highly coercive. In turn, false confessors who were seen as more responsible received smaller damage awards. Implications for trial procedure and exoneree compensation are discussed.     

Predictors of verdict and punitive damages in high-stakes civil litigation

This research investigated demographic and attitudinal- psychological predictors of verdict and amount of punitive damages awarded in high-stakes civil litigation. Four hundred and forty-six surrogate jurors, selected to be representative of actual jurors, were exposed to realistic case presentations in insurance, tobacco, and pharmaceutical cases that were about to go to trial. Hierarchical regression revealed that perceptions of the existence of a litigation crisis predicted verdict in the tobacco and pharmaceutical cases after controlling for all other variables. Demographic variables predicted verdict and punitive damage awards only modestly and in different ways in the three cases. Need for cognition, strength of will and rationality, and a perception that there is a litigation crisis predicted the amount of punitive damages awarded in the tobacco case. Litigation crisis also predicted the amount of punitive damages awarded in the pharmaceutical case. Implications for jury selection are discussed.     

Resistance is futile: The unwitting insertion of analogical inferences in memory

Analogical inferences can modify people’s understanding, but can this occur even when the inferences are unpalatable? We report two experiments suggesting that this is the case. Participants read a source passage on the role and status of gay people in society. Half then read an analogy describing the historical persecution of left-handers. On a subsequent recognition test, the participants who read the analogy were more likely than the control participants to misrecognize analogical inferences as statements explicitly presented, but the two groups did not differ in recognition rates for other kinds of statements. A priori explicit attitudes toward gays did not moderate these findings, although the participants with more positive attitudes toward gays saw the analogy to left-handers as more sound. Our findings demonstrate that analogical inferences can be seamlessly integrated into mental representations of the target domain even when those inferences are unpalatable; in short, resistance to analogy is futile.     

Age differences in attitude change: influences of cognitive resources and motivation on responses to argument quantity

This study examined the influences of cognitive resources and motivation on how young and older adults process different quantities of persuasive arguments. In the first experiment session, both young and older adults rated their attitudes toward marijuana legalization and capital punishment. After a week, they read either 3 or 9 similar-quality arguments supporting marijuana legalization and capital punishment. Half of participants were assigned to the high-involvement condition (i.e., told that they were going to discuss the arguments later with the experimenter) and the other half were assigned to the low-involvement condition (i.e., given no instructions). After reading the arguments, participants rated their attitudes toward those 2 social issues again. Highly involved young adults changed their attitudes regardless of the quantity of arguments, whereas lowly involved young adults' attitude change was influenced by the argument quantity. Older adults in both high-involvement and low-involvement conditions changed their attitudes according to the argument quantity. Working memory was found to mediate the age effects on attitude change. This finding demonstrated the importance of a cognitive mechanism in accounting for age differences in attitude change.     

The effects of defendant remorse on mock juror decisions in a malpractice case

The purpose of this study was to observe the effects of defendant remorse on monetary damages awarded to a plaintiff in a malpractice case. In two experiments, the physician-defendant expressed remorse at the time of the incident and again at trial, expressed remorse at trial, explicitly demonstrated a lack of remorse at trial, or made no mention of remorse (or a lack thereof). Participants decided how much money to award to the plaintiff and evaluated both the plaintiff and the defendant on several dimensions. Participants awarded greater compensation when the physician expressed remorse at the time of the incident than in the other conditions, both when the plaintiff was the injured patient's spouse in a wrongful death suit (experiment 1) and when the patient sued on his own behalf (experiment 2). This effect of remorse was greater for males than for females (experiment 1) and for relatively severely injured plaintiffs (experiment 2).     

Client-therapist intimacy: responses of psychotherapy clients to a consumer-oriented brochure

Psychotherapy clients read two consumer-oriented brochures: a general brochure on psychology and a brochure on the topic of client-therapist intimacy. Half of the participants read the general brochure first and the brochure on client-therapist intimacy second, and half the participants did the reverse. Participants reported favorable reactions to the brochures, indicating they thought both should be made available to psychotherapy clients; that neither were too long, too sensitive, or too difficult to read; and that the brochures should be made available early during the therapeutic process. After reading the client-therapist intimacy brochure, participants also showed some changes in Likert-type scores measuring attitudes regarding intimate contact between clients and therapists. Although participants were more negative about issues of sexual misconduct after reading the client-therapist intimacy brochure, they did not indicate a decrease in trust of therapists, nor did they indicate a greater likelihood of filing a false complaint. We concluded that therapists' reservations about presenting clients with factual information regarding therapist sexual exploitation of clients are not empirically founded.     

Client-Therapist Intimacy: Responses of Psychotherapy Clients to a Consumer-Oriented Brochure

Psychotherapy clients read two consumer-oriented brochures: a general brochure on psychology and a brochure on the topic of client-therapist intimacy. Half of the participants read the general brochure first and the brochure on client-therapist intimacy second, and half the participants did the reverse. Participants reported favorable reactions to the brochures, indicating they thought both should be made available to psychotherapy clients; that neither were too long, too sensitive, or too difficult to read; and that the brochures should be made available early during the therapeutic process. After reading the client-therapist intimacy brochure, participants also showed some changes in Likert-type scores measuring attitudes regarding intimate contact between clients and therapists. Although participants were more negative about issues of sexual misconduct after reading the client-therapist intimacy brochure, they did not indicate a decrease in trust of therapists, nor did they indicate a greater likelihood of filing a false complaint. We concluded that therapists' reservations about presenting clients with factual information regarding therapist sexual exploitation of clients are not empirically founded.     

Decision‐making in civil litigation: Effects of attorney credibility,evidence strength,and juror cognitive processing

The current study examined the relationship between juror cognitive processing (measured by need for cognition [NFC]), attorney credibility, evidence strength, and civil litigation verdicts (liability, likelihood of causation, and compensatory damages). Participants (N = 446) viewed a videotaped mock civil trial in which the credibility of the attorneys and the strength of the plaintiff's evidence were manipulated. Plaintiff attorney credibility, defense attorney credibility, and strength of evidence interacted with one another for liability verdicts. In the strong evidence condition, the likelihood of a liable verdict was higher for a credible plaintiff attorney than a non‐credible plaintiff attorney when facing a non‐credible defense attorney. In the ambiguous evidence condition, the likelihood of a liable verdict was higher for a credible plaintiff attorney than a non‐credible plaintiff attorney when facing a credible defense attorney. Plaintiff attorney credibility, however, was found to be more influential on jurors’ decision‐making than case evidence for likelihood of causation and compensatory damage award decisions. Participants’ NFC also interacted with plaintiff attorney credibility. High NFC jurors were more influenced by a credible plaintiff attorney than low NFC jurors. Although these findings are counter to common findings in the NFC literature, they conform to a body of literature that supports the notion that jurors view attorney credibility as a piece of case evidence and not a peripheral cue as is often assumed. Thus, the findings indicate that attorneys do matter to the outcomes of cases. Policy and practice implications for attorneys and the courts are discussed.     

From Compassion to Compensation: The Effect of Injury Severity on Mock Jurors' Liability Judgments1

Two studies were performed to ascertain the effect of injury severity on participants' judgments in a simulated jury task. Participants read a summary of a personal-injury case in which the severity of the plaintiffs injury was varied; they were asked to judge the defendant's liability, award compensation. and rate their feelings toward the litigants. In Study I, more severely hurt plaintiffs were more likely to obtain a favorable verdict, even though evidence of liability was held constant. Greater severity influenced liability judgments only insofar as it elicited positive feelings toward the plaintiff or negative feelings toward the defendant, In Study 2, severity was found to have no effect when participants could not award damages, suggesting that more severe injuries arouse feelings for the litigants that are associated with a motivation to alleviate the plaintiffs suffering or to punish the defendant. Strategies for reducing the extralegal influence of injury severity are discussed.     

Improving Children's Attitudes Toward Refugees: An Evaluation of a School‐Based Multicultural Curriculum and an Anti‐Racist Intervention1

We evaluated the impact of the Friendship Project, a program designed to improve elementary school children's attitudes toward refugees. Participants either received 4 weekly lessons based on the program, or they received no lessons. All participants completed attitude measures before and after implementation of the program. Half completed the post‐test 1 week after completion of the program, while the other half completed the post‐test 7 weeks after its completion. The program led to more positive attitudes toward refugees in the short term, but not in the long term. Moreover, although it did not increase empathy, the program increased the proportion of participants who preferred an acculturation strategy of integration and reduced the number of participants who had conflictual acculturative fit.     

Numeracy in the jury box: Numerical ability,meaningful anchors,and damage award decision making

This project employs an experimental design to test theoretical predictions regarding how numeracy can assist jurors in determining damage awards to compensate a plaintiff for pain and suffering and how the use of meaningful numerical anchors may produce similar benefits. Mock jurors (N = 345) reviewed a legal case and were asked to give a dollar award to compensate the plaintiff for pain and suffering. The presence and nature of a numerical anchor and the duration of pain and suffering were manipulated. Participants' numeracy was measured. Results provided support for predictions. Jurors higher in numeracy gave awards that more appropriately reflected the duration of pain and suffering and showed less variability in awards. Similar benefits were obtained by exposing jurors to meaningful numerical anchors to help them contextualize dollar amounts. Thus, introducing meaningful anchors to jurors may provide similar benefits to numeracy, without the drawbacks associated with selecting only numerate jurors.