The more you ask for, the more you get: Anchoring in personal injury verdicts

Applied Cognitive Psychology

Volumn 10, Issue 6, 1996, Pages 519-540

  Chapman, Gretchen B ^a   Bornstein, Brian H ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO   (United States)

^b LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0001067196     PISSN: 08884080     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-0720(199612)10:6<519::AID-ACP417>3.0.CO;2-5     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Arkes, H. R. (1989). Principles in judgment/decision making research pertinent to legal proceedings. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 7, 429-456.
2. Baron, R. M. and Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182.
3. Bermant, G., McGuire, M., McKinley, W. and Salo, C. (1974). The logic of simulation injury research. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 1, 224-233.
4. Bodenhausen, G. V. and Lichtenstein, M. (1987). Social stereotypes and information-processing strategies: the impact of task complexity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 267-282.
5. Bornstein, B. H. (1991). The effect of sympathy on attributions of liability: legal and Bayesian perspectives. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.
6. Bornstein, B. H. (1994). David, Goliath, and Reverend Bayes: prior beliefs about defendants' status in personal injury cases. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 8, 233-258.
7. Bornstein, B. H. and Rajki, M. (1994). Extra-legal factors and product liability: the influence of mock jurors' demographic characteristics and intuitions about the cause of an injury. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 12, 127-147.
8. Bray, R. M. and Kerr, N. L. (1982). Methodological considerations in the study of the psychology of the courtroom. In N. L. Kerr and R. M. Bray (Eds.), The psychology of the courtroom. New York: Academic Press.
9. Broeder, D. W. (1959). The University of Chicago jury project. Nebraska Law Review, 38, 744-760.
10. Carlson, B. W. (1990). Anchoring and adjustment in judgments under risk. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 655-676.
11. Caverni, J. P. and Pris, J. L. (1990). The anchoring-adjustment heuristic in an "information rich, real world setting": knowledge assessment by experts. In J.-P. Caverni, J.-M. Fabre and M. Gonzalez (eds.), Cognitive biases. New York: North-Holland.
12. Cervone, D. and Peake, P. K. (1986). Anchoring, efficacy, and action: the influence of judgmental heuristics on self-efficacy judgments and behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 492-501.
13. Chapman, G. B. and Johnson, E. J. (1994). The limits of anchoring. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 7, 223-242.
14. Chapman, G. B. and Johnson, E. J. (1996). Anchoring, confirmatory search, and the construction of values. Manuscript under review.
15. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
16. Davis, H. L., Hoch, S. J. and Ragsdale, E. E. (1986). An anchoring and adjustment model of spousal predictions. Journal of Consumer Research, 13, 25-37.
17. Ebbesen, E. B. and Koneĉni, V. J. (1981). The process of sentencing adult felons. In B. D. Sales (Ed.), The trial process (pp. 413-458). New York: Plenum.
18. Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole and J. L. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and Semantics: Vol. 3. Speech acts (pp. 41-58). New York: Academic Press.
19. Hammitt, J. K., Carroll, S. J. and Relles, D. A. (1985). Tort standards and jury decisions. Journal of Legal Studies, 14, 751-762.
20. Hastie, R., Penrod, S. and Pennington, N. (1983). Inside the jury. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
21. Horowitz, I. A. and Bordens, K. S. (1990). An experimental investigation of procedural issues in complex tort trials. Law and Human Behavior, 14, 269-285.
22. Horowitz, I. A. and Sequin, D. G. (1986). The effects of bifurcation and death qualification on assignment of penalty in capital crimes. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 16, 165-185.
23. Johnson, E. J. and Schkade, D. A. (1989). Bias in utility assessments: further evidence and explanations. Management Science, 35, 406-424.
24. Juhnke, R., Vought, C., Pyszczynski, T., Dane, F., Losure, B. and Wrightsman, L. (1979). Effects of presentation mode upon mock jurors' reactions to a trial. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 5, 36-39.
25. Kahneman, D. and Tversky, A. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124-1131.
26. Kalven, H. and Zeisel, H. (1966). The American jury. Boston: Little, Brown.
27. Kramer, G. P. and Kerr, N. L. (1989). Laboratory simulation and bias in the study of juror behavior: a methodological note. Law and Human Behavior, 13, 89-99.
28. Lempert, R. O. and Sanders, J. (1986). An invitation to law and social science: desert, disputes, and distribution. New York: Longman.
29. Markovsky, B. (1988). Anchoring justice. Social Psychology Quarterly, 51, 213-224.
30. Northcraft, G. B. and Neale, M. A. (1987). Experts, amateurs, and real estate: an anchoring-and-adjustment perspective on property pricing decisions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 39, 84-97.
31. Raitz, A., Greene, E., Goodman, J. and Loftus, E. F. (1990). Determining damages: the influence of expert testimony on jurors' decision making. Law and Human Behavior, 14, 385-395.
32. Russo, J. E. and Shoemaker, P. J. H. (1989). Decision traps. New York: Simon & Schuster.
33. Saks, M. J. and Kidd, R. F. (1980). Human information processing and adjudication: trial by heuristics. Law and Society Review, 15, 123-160.
34. Schkade, D. A. and Johnson, E. J. (1989). Cognitive processes in preference reversals. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 44, 203-231.
35. Thomas, E. A. C. and Parpal, M. (1987). Liability as a function of plaintiff and defendant fault. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 843-857.
36. Visher, C. A. (1987). Juror decision making: the importance of evidence. Law and Human Behavior, 11, 1-17.
37. Wexler, D. B. and Schopp, R. F. (1989). How and when to correct for juror hindsight bias in mental health malpractice litigation: some preliminary observations. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 1, 485-504.