Determining damages: The psychology of jury awards.

Abstract

Determining Damages: The Psychology of Jury Awards is a comprehensive empirical analysis of the reasoning process behind jurors' complex task of deciding damage awards, and how those decision-making processes are sometimes impaired by the structural and procedural elements of civil jury trials. Greene (psychology, University of Colorado, Colorado Springs) and Bornstein (psychology and law, University of Nebraska) move seamlessly from the historical roots of damage awards, to concerns and critiques of jury damage awards, to potential system reforms. The book is divided into three sections that cover the influencing factors in damage assessment. The first section explores "The Issue of Identity" or the extra legal factors of how plaintiff, defendant and juror characteristics influence damage award decisions. The authors wade through the research and, not surprisingly, conclude that demographic factors have not proven to consistently relate to jury awards. Greene and Bornstein also note that factors like "locus of control" and "authoritarianism" that have been shown to matter in criminal cases have not proven to be as powerful of predictors in civil cases. What does seem to matter, however, is jurors' specific beliefs about the system of tort litigation. The beliefs and cognitions that have implications for one's life (e.g., "What is the likelihood that I will be sued?" "What will an award do to escalating insurance rates?") tend to predict damage award behavior better than beliefs that are not personally relevant.

Measuring damages for lost enjoyment of life: The view from the bench and the jury box.

“…Despite an accumulating body of research on how jurors make damage awards (for reviews, see Greene & Bornstein, 2003;Hans, 2000;Vidmar, 1998), hedonic damages have received scant empirical attention. What research has been conducted has found that the effect of an injury on a person's lifestyle (i.e., LEL) is strongly correlated with people's (e.g., mock jurors') perceptions of the injury's severity and their noneconomic damage awards (Andrews, Meyer, & Berla', 1996;Wissler, Evans, Hart, Morry, & Saks, 1997).…”

Elder research: filling an important gap in psychology and law

“…Research has produced mixed results concerning the effects of jurors' demographic characteristics on verdicts, but generally they only provide a weak or inconsistent influence in both civil and criminal cases (Greene & Bornstein, 2003). Of course, when age is examined in jury studies it is commonly in reference to a student versus a non-student sample of mock jurors (Bornstein, 1999) and not based on comparisons of the elderly versus the non-elderly.…”

Punished, dead or alive: Empirical perspectives on awarding punitive damages against deceased defendants.

“…Compensatory damage awards include economic damages (e.g., medical bills, lost work) and noneconomic damages (e.g., money for pain and suffering) (for a review, see Greene & Bornstein, 2003). In addition to compensatory damages, most states also allow some form of punitive or exemplary damages against defendants who act in a reckless, willful, or wanton manner (Restatement [Second] of Torts, 1965, §908).…”