Double discounting: The effects of comparative negligence on mock juror decision making

Douglas J. Zickafoose, Brian H. Bornstein

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

19 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Two experiments were conducted to ascertain the effects of comparative negligence on damage awards. Participants awarded damages for a mock medical malpractice case in which the level of the plaintiff's negligence was varied. Both experiments showed that damage awards were doubly discounted for partially negligent plaintiffs. Experiment 1 also found that the responses of college students did not differ from those of people who had been called for jury duty. Experiment 2 examined four components of the damage award and showed that the reduction due to the level of the plaintiff's negligence occurred only in damages for bodily harm. Implications for the judicial system are discussed.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)577-596
Number of pages20
JournalLaw and human behavior
Volume23
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 13 1999

Fingerprint

Malpractice
Decision Making
damages
decision making
experiment
Students
Jurors
Damage
Negligence
Experiment
student

ASJC Scopus subject areas

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

Cite this

Double discounting : The effects of comparative negligence on mock juror decision making. / Zickafoose, Douglas J.; Bornstein, Brian H.

In: Law and human behavior, Vol. 23, No. 5, 13.09.1999, p. 577-596.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{f9f282339c4f4e1998b169ec8a3fac40,
title = "Double discounting: The effects of comparative negligence on mock juror decision making",
abstract = "Two experiments were conducted to ascertain the effects of comparative negligence on damage awards. Participants awarded damages for a mock medical malpractice case in which the level of the plaintiff's negligence was varied. Both experiments showed that damage awards were doubly discounted for partially negligent plaintiffs. Experiment 1 also found that the responses of college students did not differ from those of people who had been called for jury duty. Experiment 2 examined four components of the damage award and showed that the reduction due to the level of the plaintiff's negligence occurred only in damages for bodily harm. Implications for the judicial system are discussed.",
author = "Zickafoose, {Douglas J.} and Bornstein, {Brian H.}",
year = "1999",
month = "9",
day = "13",
doi = "10.1023/A:1022300313628",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "23",
pages = "577--596",
journal = "Law and Human Behavior",
issn = "0147-7307",
publisher = "Springer New York",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Double discounting

T2 - The effects of comparative negligence on mock juror decision making

AU - Zickafoose, Douglas J.

AU - Bornstein, Brian H.

PY - 1999/9/13

Y1 - 1999/9/13

N2 - Two experiments were conducted to ascertain the effects of comparative negligence on damage awards. Participants awarded damages for a mock medical malpractice case in which the level of the plaintiff's negligence was varied. Both experiments showed that damage awards were doubly discounted for partially negligent plaintiffs. Experiment 1 also found that the responses of college students did not differ from those of people who had been called for jury duty. Experiment 2 examined four components of the damage award and showed that the reduction due to the level of the plaintiff's negligence occurred only in damages for bodily harm. Implications for the judicial system are discussed.

AB - Two experiments were conducted to ascertain the effects of comparative negligence on damage awards. Participants awarded damages for a mock medical malpractice case in which the level of the plaintiff's negligence was varied. Both experiments showed that damage awards were doubly discounted for partially negligent plaintiffs. Experiment 1 also found that the responses of college students did not differ from those of people who had been called for jury duty. Experiment 2 examined four components of the damage award and showed that the reduction due to the level of the plaintiff's negligence occurred only in damages for bodily harm. Implications for the judicial system are discussed.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0032881594&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0032881594&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1023/A:1022300313628

DO - 10.1023/A:1022300313628

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:0032881594

VL - 23

SP - 577

EP - 596

JO - Law and Human Behavior

JF - Law and Human Behavior

SN - 0147-7307

IS - 5

ER -