All anchors are not created equal: The effects of per diem versus lump sum requests on pain and suffering awards

Bradley D. McAuliff, Brian H Bornstein

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

11 Citations (Scopus)

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.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)164-174
Number of pages11
JournalLaw and human behavior
Volume34
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 1 2010

Fingerprint

pain
damages
Pain
quantification
liability
rating
Lawyers
experiment
community
Research Design
Damage
Anchor
Wounds and Injuries
literature
Experiment
Liability
Rating
Juries
Quantification
Anchoring

Keywords

  • Anchoring and adjustment
  • Civil litigation
  • Juror pain and suffering awards
  • Per diem arguments

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous)
  • Psychology(all)
  • Psychiatry and Mental health
  • Law

Cite this

All anchors are not created equal : The effects of per diem versus lump sum requests on pain and suffering awards. / McAuliff, Bradley D.; Bornstein, Brian H.

In: Law and human behavior, Vol. 34, No. 2, 01.04.2010, p. 164-174.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{3f1b8069cf764ff1b854c85ba50fb12c,
title = "All anchors are not created equal: The effects of per diem versus lump sum requests on pain and suffering awards",
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.",
keywords = "Anchoring and adjustment, Civil litigation, Juror pain and suffering awards, Per diem arguments",
author = "McAuliff, {Bradley D.} and Bornstein, {Brian H}",
year = "2010",
month = "4",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/s10979-009-9178-8",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "34",
pages = "164--174",
journal = "Law and Human Behavior",
issn = "0147-7307",
publisher = "Springer New York",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - All anchors are not created equal

T2 - The effects of per diem versus lump sum requests on pain and suffering awards

AU - McAuliff, Bradley D.

AU - Bornstein, Brian H

PY - 2010/4/1

Y1 - 2010/4/1

N2 - 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.

AB - 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.

KW - Anchoring and adjustment

KW - Civil litigation

KW - Juror pain and suffering awards

KW - Per diem arguments

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77954458897&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=77954458897&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s10979-009-9178-8

DO - 10.1007/s10979-009-9178-8

M3 - Article

C2 - 19462225

AN - SCOPUS:77954458897

VL - 34

SP - 164

EP - 174

JO - Law and Human Behavior

JF - Law and Human Behavior

SN - 0147-7307

IS - 2

ER -