Psychology, Department of
Department of Psychology: Faculty Publications
Accessibility Remediation
If you are unable to use this item in its current form due to accessibility barriers, you may request remediation through our remediation request form.
Document Type
Article
Date of this Version
2010
Citation
Published in Law and Human Behavior 34:2 (2010), pp. 164-174; doi: 10.1007/s10979-009-9178-8
Abstract
This experiment examined whether different quantifications of the same damage award request ($175,000 lump sum, $10/ hour, $240/day, $7300/month for 2 years) influenced pain and suffering awards compared to no damage award request. Jury-eligible community members (N = 180) read a simulated personal injury case in which defendant liability already had been determined. Awards were: (1) larger for the $10/hour and $175,000 conditions than the $7300/month and control conditions and (2) more variable for the $10/hour condition than the $7300/month and control conditions. No differences emerged on ratings of the parties, their attorneys, or the difficulty of picking a compensation figure. We discuss the theoretical implications of our data for the anchoring and adjustment literature and the practical implications for legal professionals.
Comments
Copyright © 2009 American Psychology-Law Society/Division 41 of the American Psychological Association. Used by permission.