An experimental investigation of procedural issues in complex tort trials

An investigation of the impact of innovations in civil trial procedure manipulated trial structure (unitary vs. separated trial issues), order of decisions (liability or causation first), and number of decisions made (one to four) in a simulated toxic tort trial. Juries gave verdicts and damage awards. Recordings were made of the juries' deliberations. The results showed significantly more verdicts in favor of the plaintiffs in unitary trials (causation, liability, and damages heard together) as opposed to separated trials. However, average damage awards were higher in the separated than in the unitary trial conditions. Juries assigned more responsibility to the defendant in the unitary trial. Juries also used the totality of the evidence to decide all issues, especially general causation, which contained the most ambiguous testimony. The performance of these simulated juries in complex litigation was discussed in terms of group and individual cognitive factors.     

Joinder of criminal offenses: A review of the legal and psychological literature

Criminal courts routinely allow a defendant to be tried for multiple charges in a single trial. The practice is known as joinder of offenses. The issue of joinder of offenses is examined from a legal and psychological perspective. Relevant court decisions and their implications are discussed. In addition, the recent research conducted by social scientists concerning the possible reasons for the prejudicial effects of joinder of offenses is critically reviewed. Suggestions are offered, based upon previous joinder research, for the direction of future research into the loci of the effect and into potential remedies.This paper is an elaboration of one presented at the annual meeting of the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences, Chicago, March 1984.     

The effects of outlier presence,plaintiff population size,and aggregation of plaintiffs on simulated civil jury decisions

An experiment was performed to determine the effects of the size of the plaintiff population, the presence or absence of an outlier, defined as a plaintiff whose injuries were significantly more severe than other plaintiffs, and whether plaintiffs were tried individually or were aggregated in a group. Sixty-six person juries were assigned to one of eleven experimental conditions, listened to a 4-h toxic tort tria, and after deliberating, delivered verdicts on liability, and damage awards. The verdicts were increased significantly by the presence of an outlier and by an increase in the plaintiff population. While the punitive awards were higher in the outlier condition, there was also a tendency for juries to find the company not liable.The meaning of the above findings, as well as the fact that juries exhibited great variability in their verdicts was discussed. Evidence as to the decision-making process of the juries was also gathered and discussed.This research was supported by National Science Foundation Grant SES 860 9892 and by a University of Toledo College of Arts and Sciences Faculty Development Grant. Special thanks to members of the Toledo Repertoire Theatre and University of Toledo Theatre Department for their assistance in preparing the materials for this study.