Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
Loading next page...
/lp/american-psychological-association/punitive-damage-decision-making-the-decisions-of-citizens-and-trial-aoflIBJ0QC
References (77)
-
L. M. Sharkey (1996)
Judge or jury: Who should assess punitive damages?University of Cincinatti Law Review, 64
-
L. B. Sand, J. S. Siffert, W. P. Loughlin, S. A. Reiss (1996)
Modern Federal Jury Instructions (Vol. 4) -
M. Kaplan, Charles Miller (1987)
Group decision making and normative versus informational influence: Effects of type of issue and assigned decision rule.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53
-
R. MacCoun (1996)
Differential treatment of corporate defendants by juries : An examination of the deep-pockets hypothesisLaw & Society Review, 30
-
(1998)
Sympathy and legal judgment: A psychological analysis -
A. Kaplan (1967)
Behavioral Science and the LawCase Western Reserve law review, 19
-
(1995)
State-law punitive damage schemes and the Seventh Amendment right to jury trial in the federal courts -
(1996)
A step above anecdote: A profile of the civil jury in the 1990s -
E. Greene, Jane Goodman, E. Loftus (1991)
Jurors' Attitudes About Civil Litigation and the Size of Damage AwardsThe American University law review, 40
-
(1994)
Homestead Insurance Co -
C. Guthrie, J. Rachlinski, Andrew Wistrich (2001)
Inside the Judicial MindCornell Law Review, 86
-
D. Schkade, C. Sunstein, D. Kahneman (2000)
Deliberating About Dollars: The Severity ShiftMicroeconomic Theory eJournal
-
S. S. Diamond, M. J. Saks, S. Landsman (1998)
Jurors judgments about liability and damages: Sources of variability and ways to increase consistencyDePaul Law Review, 48
-
N. Vidmar, F. Gross, M. Rose (1998)
Jury Awards for Medical Malpractice and Post-Verdict Adjustments of Those AwardsDepaul Law Review, 48
-
M. Karlovac, J. Darley (1988)
Attribution of Responsibility for Accidents: A Negligence Law AnalogySocial Cognition, 6
-
N. Vidmar (1995)
Medical Malpractice and the American Jury: Confronting the Myths about Jury Incompetence, Deep Pockets, and Outrageous Damage Awards -
(1991)
Pacific Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. Haslip, 499 U.S. 1306, 111 S. Ct. 1032, 112 L.Ed.2d -
R. Lempert (1999)
Juries, hindsight, and punitive damage awards: Failures of a social science case for changeDePaul Law Review, 48
-
(1997)
Jury determination of punitive damages -
R. Baron, D. Kenny (1986)
The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations.Journal of personality and social psychology, 51 6
-
J. Robbennolt (2000)
Outcome Severity and Judgments of “Responsibility”: A Meta‐Analytic ReviewJournal of Applied Social Psychology, 30
-
(1998)
Multidimensional Perceptions of injury: Implications for the " adversary culture -
M. Anderson, R. MacCoun (1999)
Goal Conflict in Juror Assessments of Compensatory and Punitive DamagesLaw and Human Behavior, 23
-
V. Hans, W. Lofquist (1992)
Jurors' Judgments of Business Liability in Tort Cases: Implications for the Litigation ExplosionLaw & Society Review, 26
-
E. Greene, W. Woody, Ryan Winter (2000)
Compensating Plaintiffs and Punishing Defendants: Is Bifurcation Necessary?Law and Human Behavior, 24
-
M. Peterson (1984)
Compensation of injuries : civil jury verdicts in Cook County -
Damage Award Decisions -
D. Kahneman, D. Schkade, C. Sunstein (1998)
Shared Outrage and Erratic Awards: The Psychology of Punitive DamagesJournal of Risk and Uncertainty, 16
-
L. Sand, J. Siffert, W. Loughlin, S. Reiss (2001)
Modern federal jury instructions -
W. Buckland, H. Hotelling, I. Olkin (1960)
Contributions to Probability and Statistics -
H. Kalven (1964)
The Dignity of the Civil JuryVirginia Law Review, 50
-
Michael Rustad (1992)
In Defense of Punitive Damages in Products Liability: Testing Tort Anecdotes with Empirical Data -
Roselle Wissler, M. Saks, Allen Hart (1999)
Decisionmaking About General Damages: A Comparison of Jurors, Judges, and Lawyers -
W. Viscusi, R. Hastie (1998)
What Juries Can't Do Well: The Jury's Performance as a Risk Manager -
J. Robbennolt (2002)
Determining Punitive Damages: Empirical Insights and Implications for ReformSocial Science Research Network
-
J. Robbennolt, C. Studebaker (1999)
Anchoring in the Courtroom: The Effects of Caps on Punitive DamagesLaw and Human Behavior, 23
-
A. Polinsky, S. Shavell (1998)
Punitive Damages: An Economic AnalysisHarvard Law Review, 111
-
T. Eisenberg, Neil LaFountain, Brian Ostrom, D. Rottman, M. Wells (2000)
Juries, Judges, and Punitive Damages: An Empirical StudyCornell Law Review, 87
-
M. Taragin, L. Willett, Adam Wilczek, R. Trout, Jeffrey Carson (1992)
The influence of standard of care and severity of injury on the resolution of medical malpractice claims.Annals of internal medicine, 117 9
-
S. Landsman, S. S. Diamond, L. Dimitropoulos, M. J. Saks (1998)
Be careful what you wish for: The paradoxical effects of bifurcating claims for punitive damagesWisconsin Law Review, 1998
-
D. Crump (1996)
Evidence, Economics and Ethics: What Information Should Jurors Use to Determine the Amount of a Punitive Damage Award?Maryland Law Review, 57
-
W. Viscusi (2000)
Jurors, Judges, and the Mistreatment of Risk by the CourtsThe Journal of Legal Studies, 30
-
(1997)
Miss. Code Ann -
A. Scheiner (1991)
Judicial Assessment of Punitive Damages, the Seventh Amendment, and the Politics of Jury PowerColumbia Law Review, 91
-
T. Eisenberg, M. Wells (1998)
Punitive Awards After BMW, a New Capping System, and the Reported Opinion Bias -
(1999)
43 Style file version Nov. 19th -
(1998)
Unraveling punitive damages: Current data and further inquiry -
M. Saks (1992)
Do We Really Know Anything About the Behavior of the Tort Litigation System-And Why NotUniversity of Pennsylvania Law Review, 140
-
E. Pedhazur (1982)
Multiple Regression in Behavioral Research: Explanation and Prediction -
E. Howe, Thomas Loftus (1992)
Integration of Intention and Outcome Information by Students and Circuit Court Judges: Design Economy and Individual Differences1Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22
-
S. Kassin, L. Wrightsman (1988)
The American Jury on Trial: Psychological Perspectives -
(1999)
GDR-FhN Law and Human Behavior [lahu] PP461 -
K. Clermont, T. Eisenberg (1992)
Trial by Jury or Judge: Transcending EmpiricismCornell Law Review, 77
-
C. Sunstein, D. Kahneman, D. Schkade (1998)
Assessing Punitive Damages (with Notes on Cognition and Valuation in Law)Yale Law Journal, 107
-
(1996)
Discovery of net worth in bifurcated punitive damages cases: A suggested approach after Transportation Insurance Co. v -
M. Galanter, D. Luban (1993)
Poetic Justice: Punitive Damages and Legal PluralismThe American University law review, 42
-
(1993)
Alliance Resources Corp., 509 U.S. 443, 113 S. Ct. 2711, 125 L.Ed.2d 366 -
Scott Decker (1979)
Law and Society ReviewJournal of Drug Issues, 9
-
(1989)
Kelco Disposal, Inc., 492 U.S. 257, 109 S. Ct. 2909, 106 L.Ed.2d 219 -
R. Hastie, D. Schkade, J. Payne (1999)
Juror Judgments in Civil Cases: Effects of Plaintiff's Requests and Plaintiff's Identity on Punitive Damage AwardsLaw and Human Behavior, 23
-
(1998)
Jurors judgments about liability and damages: Sources -
D. Owen (1994)
A Punitive Damages Overview: Functions, Problems and ReformVillanova law review, 39
-
V. Hans, W. Lofquist (1994)
Perceptions of Civil Justice: The Litigation Crisis Attitudes of Civil JurorsBehavioral Sciences & The Law, 12
-
(1997)
Mo. Rev. Stat. § -
(1994)
Attitudes toward tort reform, scientific jury selection, and juror bias: Verdict inclination in criminal and civil trials -
C. Cather, E. Greene, R. Durham (1996)
Plaintiff injury and defendant reprehensibility: Implications for compensatory and punitive damage awardsLaw and Human Behavior, 20
-
J. K. Robbennolt (2002)
Determining Punitive Damages: Empirical Insights and Implications for ReformBuffalo Law Review, 50
-
M. Saks, L. Hollinger, Roselle Wissler, David Evans, Allen Hart (1997)
Reducing Variability in Civil Jury AwardsLaw and Human Behavior, 21
-
T. Koenig, Michael Rustad (1993)
The Quiet Revolution Revisited: An Empirical Study of the Impact of State Tort Reform of Punitive Damages in Products LiabilityJustice System Journal, 16
-
Stephan Landsman, R. Rakos (1994)
A preliminary inquiry into the effect of potentially biasing information on judges and jurors in civil litigationBehavioral Sciences & The Law, 12
-
(1996)
Judge or jury: Who should assess punitive damages? University of Cincinatti Law Review -
J. Davis, W. Au, L. Hulbert, Xiao-Ping Chen, Paul Zarnoth (1997)
Effects of group size and procedural influence on consensual judgments of quantity: The example of damage awards and mock civil juriesJournal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73
-
Paul Mogin (1998)
Why Judges, Not Juries, Should Set Punitive DamagesUniversity of Chicago Law Review, 65
-
H. Levene (1961)
Robust tests for equality of variances -
D. Schkade, C. R. Sunstein, D. Kahneman (2000)
Deliberating about dollars: The severity shiftColumbia Law Review, 100
-
Stephan Landsman, S. Diamond, Linda Dimitropoulos, M. Saks (1998)
Proposed reforms and their effects: Be careful what you wish for: The paradoxical effects of bifurcating claims for punitive damagesWisconsin Law Review, 1998
-
A. Goldstein, H. Kalven, H. Zeisel, Thomas Callahan, P. Ennis (1966)
The American JuryLaw & Society Review, 1
- Publisher
- American Psychological Association
- Copyright
- Copyright © 2002 American Psychological Association
- ISSN
- 0147-7307
- eISSN
- 1573-661X
- DOI
- 10.1023/A:1015376421813
- Publisher site
- See Article on Publisher Site
Abstract
Some states have allocated the authority to determine the amount of punitive damages to judges rather than to juries. This study explored the determination of damages by jury-eligible citizens and trial court judges. The punitive damage awards of both groups were of similar magnitude and variability. The compensatory damages of jurors were marginally lower but, in some conditions, were more variable than the compensatory damage awards of judges. Both groups appropriately utilized information about both the actual and potential severity of the harm to the plaintiff in determining punitive damages and used only the actual severity of the injury in determining compensatory damages. The punitive damage awards of both groups were influenced by the wealth of the defendant, but the compensatory damage awards of judges were marginally more influenced by defendant wealth than those of citizens. The results are discussed in the context of proposals for punitive damages reform.
Journal
Law and Human Behavior – American Psychological Association
Published: Jun 1, 2002