TY - JOUR
T1 - Damage Anchors on Real Juries
AU - Diamond, Shari
AU - Rose, Mary R.
AU - Murphy, Beth
AU - Meixner, John
PY - 2011/12
Y1 - 2011/12
N2 - Experiments reveal anchoring as a powerful force, even when participants see the anchor as irrelevant. Here, we examine the reactions of real deliberating jurors to attorney damage requests and concessions in 31 cases involving 33 plaintiffs in which the jury awarded damages. Jurors were critical consumers of attorney suggestions. They reacted more negatively to, and were less influenced by, plaintiff ad damnums for pain and suffering than to damage requests in categories grounded in more objective evidence. Deliberations revealed that jurors often perceive plaintiff ad damnums not only as irrelevant, but also as outrageous, impressions reflected in their verdicts. These findings suggest that extreme plaintiff ad damnums, including those without grounding in quantitative evidence from trial, may not exert substantial undue influence.
AB - Experiments reveal anchoring as a powerful force, even when participants see the anchor as irrelevant. Here, we examine the reactions of real deliberating jurors to attorney damage requests and concessions in 31 cases involving 33 plaintiffs in which the jury awarded damages. Jurors were critical consumers of attorney suggestions. They reacted more negatively to, and were less influenced by, plaintiff ad damnums for pain and suffering than to damage requests in categories grounded in more objective evidence. Deliberations revealed that jurors often perceive plaintiff ad damnums not only as irrelevant, but also as outrageous, impressions reflected in their verdicts. These findings suggest that extreme plaintiff ad damnums, including those without grounding in quantitative evidence from trial, may not exert substantial undue influence.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84867677405&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84867677405&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/j.1740-1461.2011.01232.x
DO - 10.1111/j.1740-1461.2011.01232.x
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:84867677405
SN - 1740-1453
VL - 8
SP - 148
EP - 178
JO - Journal of Empirical Legal Studies
JF - Journal of Empirical Legal Studies
IS - SUPPL.1
ER -