Conduct and its consequences: Attempts at debiasing jury judgments

Law and Human Behavior

Volumn 29, Issue 5, 2005, Pages 505-526

  Smith, Alison C ^a   Greene, Edith ^b  

^a GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO   (United States)

Author keywords

Bifurcation; Damage awards; Hindsight bias; Jury; Negligence

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BEHAVIOR; DECISION MAKING; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; INJURY; LAW SUIT; LEGAL EVIDENCE; LEGAL LIABILITY; NEGLIGENCE; NORMAL HUMAN; TRAFFIC ACCIDENT; ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ATTITUDE; CAR DRIVING; FEMALE; HEALTH INSURANCE; INSURANCE; LEGAL ASPECT; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; QUESTIONNAIRE; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR; UNITED STATES; VICTIM;

ACCIDENTS, TRAFFIC; ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ATTITUDE; AUTOMOBILE DRIVING; CRIME VICTIMS; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HUMANS; INSURANCE, ACCIDENT; INSURANCE, LIABILITY; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; QUESTIONNAIRES; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR; UNITED STATES;

EID: 33644834471     PISSN: 01477307     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10979-005-5692-5     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Arkes, H., & Schipani, C. (1994). Medical malpractice v. the business judgment rule: Differences in hindsight bias. Oregon Law Review, 73, 587-638.
2. Anderson, L., & Ager, J. (1978). Analysis of variance in small groups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 4, 341-347.
3. Baron, J., & Ritov, I. (1993). Intuitions about penalties and compensation in the context of tort law. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 7, 17-33.
4. Bornstein, B. (1998). From compassion to compensation: The effect of injury severity on mock jurors' liability judgments. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28, 1477-1502.
5. Broeder, D. (1959). The University of Chicago Jury Project. Nebraska Law Review, 38, 744-760.
6. Casper, J., Benedict, K., & Kelly, J. (1988). Cognition, attitudes and decision-making in search and seizure cases. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 18, 93-113.
7. Diamond, S., & Casper, J. (1992). Blindfolding the jury to verdict consequences: Damages, experts, and the civil jury. Law and Society Review, 26, 513-563.
8. Eichorn, L. (1989). Social science findings and the jury's ability to disregard evidence under the federal rules of evidence. Law and Contemporary Problems, 52, 341-353.
9. Fischhoff, B. (1975). Hindsight ≠ foresight: The effect of outcome knowledge on judgment under uncertainty. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1, 288-299.
10. Greene, E., Johns, M., & Bowman, J. (1999). The effect of injury severity on jury negligence decisions. Law and Human Behavior, 23, 675-693.
11. Greene, E., Johns, M., & Smith, A. (2001). The effects of defendant conduct on jury damage awards. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 228-237.
12. Hastie, R., Penrod, S., & Pennington, N. (1983). Inside the Jury. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
13. Horowitz, I., & Bordens, K. (1990). An experimental investigation of procedural issues in complex tort trials. Law and Human Behavior, 14, 269-285.
14. Jeansonne v. Landau et al., Denver county district court (1997).
15. Kamin, K., & Rachlinski, J. (1995). Ex post does not equal ex ante: Determining liability in hindsight. Law and Human Behavior, 19, 89-104.
16. Keeton, W. P. (1984). Prosser and Keeton on the Law of Torts (5th ed.). St. Paul: West.
17. Kerr, N., MacCoun, R., & Kramer, G. (1996). Bias in judgment: Comparing individuals and groups. Psychological Review, 103, 687-719.
18. Peters, P. (1999). Hindsight bias and tort liability: Avoiding premature conclusions. Arizona State Law Journal, 31, 1277-1314.
19. Rachlinski, J. (1998). A positive psychological theory of judging in hindsight. University of Chicago Law Review, 65, 571-625.
20. Saks, M., Hollinger, L., Wissler, R., Evans, D., & Hart, A. (1997). Reducing variability in civil jury awards. Law and Human Behavior, 22, 671-682.
21. Sommer, K., Horowitz, I., & Bourgeois, M. (2001). When juries fail to comply with the law: Biased evidence processing in individual and group decision making. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 309-320.
22. Stahlberg, D., Eller, F., Maass, A., & Frey, D. (1995). We knew it all along: Hindsight bias in groups. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 63, 46-58.
23. Stallard, M., & Worthington, D. (1998). Reducing the hindsight bias utilizing attorney closing arguments. Law and Human Behavior, 22, 671-682.
24. Stevens, S. (1958). Problems and methods in psychophysics. Psychological Bulletin, 55, 177-196.
25. Wexler, D., & Schopp, R. (1989). How and when to correct for juror hindsight bias in mental health malpractice litigation: Some preliminary observations. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 7, 485-497.
26. Wilson, T. (2002). Strangers to ourselves: Discovering the adaptive unconscious. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
27. Wissler, R., Rector, K., & Saks, M. (2001). The impact of jury instructions on the fusion of liability and compensatory damages. Law and Human Behavior, 25, 125-139.
28. Zeisel, H., & Callahan, T. (1963). Split trials and time-saving: A statistical analysis. Harvard Law Review, 76, 1606-1625.