Psycholegal research on jury damage awards

Current Directions in Psychological Science

Volumn 7, Issue 2, 1998, Pages 50-

  Greene, Edith ^a   Loftus, Elizabeth F ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0032221338     PISSN: 09637214     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/1467-8721.ep13175629     Document Type: Review

References (20)

1. Bovbjerg, R., Sloan, F., Dor, A., & Hsieh, C. (1991). Juries and justice: Are malpractice and other injuries created equal? Law and Contemporary Problems, 54, 5-42.
2. Broeder, D. (1959). The University of Chicago jury project. Nebraska Law Review, 38, 744-760.
3. Cather, C., Greene, E., & Durham, R. (1996). Plaintiff injury and defendant reprehensibility: Implications for compensatory and punitive damage awards. Law and Human Behavior, 20, 189-205.
4. Galanter, M. (1988). The life and times of the big six; or, the federal courts since the good old days. Wisconsin Law Review, 1988, 921-954.
5. Goodman, J., Greene, E., & Loftus, E. (1989). Runaway verdicts or reasoned determinations: Mock juror strategies in awarding damages. Jurimetrics Journal, 29, 285-309.
6. Goodman, J., Loftus, E., Miller, M., & Greene, E. (1991). Money, sex and death: Gender bias in wrongful death damage awards. Law and Society Review, 25, 263-282.
7. Greene, E. (1989). On juries and damage awards: The process of decision making. Law and Contemporary Problems, 52, 225-246.
8. Hammitt, J., Carroll, S., & Relles, D. (1985). Tort standards and jury decisions. Journal of Legal Studies, 14, 751-762.
9. Hans, V., & Ermann, M. (1989). Responses to corporate versus individual wrongdoing. Law and Human Behavior, 13, 151-166.
10. Horowitz, I., & Bordens, K. (1990). An experimental investigation of procedural issues in complex tort trials. Law and Human Behavior, 14, 269-285.
11. Koenig, T., & Rustad, M. (1993). The quiet revolution revisited: An empirical study of the impact of state tort reform of punitive damages in products liability. The Justice System Journal, 16, 21-44.
12. MacCoun, R. (1996). Differential treatment of corporate defendants by juries: An examination of the "deep-pockets" hypothesis. Law and Society Review, 30, 121-161.
13. Peterson, M. (1984). Compensation for injuries: Civil jury verdicts in Cook County. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corp.
14. Peterson, M. (1987). Civil juries in the 1980's: Trends in jury trials and verdicts in California and Cook County, Illinois. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corp.
15. Raitz, A., Greene, E., Goodman, J., & Loftus, E. (1990). Determining damages: The influence of expert testimony on juror's decision making. Law and Human Behavior, 14, 385-395.
16. Rodgers, G. (1991). Factors contributing to compensatory damage awards in product liability cases involving personal injury. Journal of Products Liability, 13, 19-29.
17. Saks, M., Hollinger, L., Wissler, R., Evans, D., & Hart, A. (1997). Reducing variability in civil jury awards. Law and Human Behavior, 21, 243-256.
18. Vidmar, N. (1993). Empirical evidence on the "deep pockets" hypothesis: Jury awards for pain and suffering in medical malpractice cases. Duke Law Journal, 43, 217-266.
19. Vidmar, N., Lee, J., Cohen, E., & Stewart, A. (1994). Damage awards and jurors' responsibility ascriptions in medical versus automobile negligence cases. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 12, 149-160.
20. Wissler, R., Evans, D., Hart, A., Morry, M., & Saks, M. (1997). Explaining "pain and suffering" awards: The role of injury characteristics and fault attributions. Law and Human Behavior, 21, 181-207.