Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
Loading next page...
/lp/springer-journals/the-effects-of-injury-severity-on-jury-negligence-decisions-K3iv99St0u
References (26)
-
P. Paulus (1983)
Basic group processesContemporary Sociology, 14
-
S. Diamond (1997)
Illuminations and Shadows from Jury SimulationsLaw and Human Behavior, 21
-
R. MacCoun (1996)
Differential treatment of corporate defendants by juries : An examination of the deep-pockets hypothesisLaw & Society Review, 30
-
E. Green (1968)
The Reasonable Man: Legal Fiction or Psychosocial Reality?Law & Society Review, 2
-
B. Bornstein (1998)
From Compassion to Compensation: The Effect of Injury Severity on Mock Jurors’ Liability JudgmentsJournal of Applied Social Psychology, 28
-
P. Tetlock (1983)
Accountability and complexity of thought.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45
-
K. Kamin, J. Rachlinski (1995)
Ex post ≠ ex ante: Determining liability in hindsightLaw and Human Behavior, 19
-
M. Bourgeois, I. Horowitz, L. Forsterlee, Jon Grahe (1995)
Nominal and Interactive Groups: Effects of Preinstruction and Deliberations on Decisions and Evidence Recall in Complex TrialsJournal of Applied Psychology, 80
-
Ewart Thomas, M. Parpal (1987)
Liability as a function of plaintiff and defendant fault.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53
-
L. Anderson, J. Ager (1978)
Analysis of variance in small groupsPersonality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 4
-
H. Tennen, G. Affleck (1990)
Blaming others for threatening events.Psychological Bulletin, 108
-
P. Keeton, W. Prosser (1984)
Prosser and Keeton on the Law of Torts -
Jeffrey Kerwin, D. Shaffer (1994)
Mock Jurors Versus Mock Juries: The Role of Deliberations in Reactions to Inadmissible TestimonyPersonality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20
-
P. Ellsworth (1989)
Are Twelve Heads Better Than OneLaw and contemporary problems, 52
-
Scott Decker (1979)
Law and Society ReviewJournal of Drug Issues, 9
-
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
-
M. Kaplan, Charles Miller (1983)
Group Discussion and Judgment -
J. Robbennolt (2000)
Outcome Severity and Judgments of “Responsibility”: A Meta‐Analytic ReviewJournal of Applied Social Psychology, 30
-
L. Anderson, J. Ager (1978)
Analysis of Variance in Small Group ResearchPersonality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 4
-
Kim Kamin, Jeffrey Rachlinski (1995)
Ex post ≠ ex anteLaw and Human Behavior, 19
-
R. Wilson, B. Jonah (1988)
Assignment of Responsibility and Penalties for an Impaired Driving Incident1Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 18
-
E. Walster (1966)
Assignment of responsibility for an accident.Journal of personality and social psychology, 3 1
-
B. Fischhoff (1975)
Hindsight = foresight: The effect of outcome knowledge on judgment under uncertaintyJournal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1
-
Baruch Fischhoff (1975)
Hindsight is not equal to foresight: The effect of outcome knowledge on judgment under uncertainty.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1
-
I. Horowitz, K. Bordens (1990)
An experimental investigation of procedural issues in complex tort trialsLaw and Human Behavior, 14
-
H. Bernstein, D. Horowitz, David Lange, H. Powell, Melvin Shimm, J. Weistart, R. Danner, Claire Germain, B. Baccari, Lisa Eichhorn, James Farrin, K. Cashion, Steven Chabinsky, Thomas Contois, James Glenister, Stephen Armitage, J. Cannon, C. Connolly, David Dabbs, Katherine Flanagan, P. Franklin, Donald Nielsen, Christopher Hart, Charles North, William O'Neil, Jane Schaefer, Eric Lieberman, Janet Moore, A. Walsh, Raymond Wierciszewski (1990)
LAW AND CONTEMPORARY PROBLEMS
- Publisher
- Springer Journals
- Copyright
- Copyright © 1999 by Plenum Publishing Corporation
- Subject
- Psychology; Law and Psychology; Criminology and Criminal Justice, general; Personality and Social Psychology; Community and Environmental Psychology
- ISSN
- 0147-7307
- eISSN
- 1573-661X
- DOI
- 10.1023/A:1022341522714
- Publisher site
- See Article on Publisher Site
Abstract
According to the laws of negligence, jurors' liability decisions are to be influenced by the defendant's conduct, but not by the severity of the plaintiff's injuries. We conducted a jury simulation study to assess whether jurors reason in this manner. We manipulated the conduct of the defendant (reasonable, careless) and the severity of injuries to the plaintiff (mild, severe) in a simulated automobile negligence case. Jurors completed predeliberation questionnaires, deliberated to a verdict, and answered postdeliberation questionnaires. The defendant's conduct had a strong impact on liability judgments, but evidence related to injury severity also had an effect, albeit smaller. We analyze these findings in the context of various cognitive and motivational theories.
Journal
Law and Human Behavior – Springer Journals
Published: Sep 30, 2004