Abstract
Psychological injury evidence is at the heart of many civil claims. Due to the recent burgeoning of sexual harassment and assault claims which predominantly involve psychological distress, it is especially important to understand how jurors process this evidence at the most basic (or schema) level, and how these preconceived notions influence processing of trial evidence and subsequent legal judgments. As a result, the present paper explores rarely addressed—but fundamental—issues regarding how jurors perceive psychological injury evidence. Specifically, do jurors have psychological injury schemas? And if so, what injuries do these schemas contain, how stable are they, how are they evaluated, and how do they affect jurors’ case perceptions and legal decisions? A review of relevant theory and empirical research reveals that jurors have psychological injury schemas, but they are often poorly developed and susceptible to the influence of prompts used to retrieve these schemas (e.g., questions posed by attorneys during voir dire, the actual injuries adduced by the plaintiff). Also interesting is that despite the relative importance of psychological injury evidence, tremendous gaps remain regarding what actual types of psychological injuries jurors believe typically result in civil cases, how stable these injury schemas are, and precisely how they affect jurors’ decisions. This paper addresses these important issues to help organize and direct future research on the subject, including proposing a model for how psychological injury schemas interact with jurors’ perceptions of the plaintiff’s alleged injuries to affect their legal decisions.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Alba, J. W., & Hasher, L. (1983). Is memory schematic? Psychological Bulletin, 93, 203–231. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.93.2.203.
Anderson, R. C. (1978). Schema-directed processes in language comprehension. In A. M. Lesgold, J. W. Pellegrino, S. D. Fokkema, & R. Glaser (Eds.), Cognitive Psychology and Instruction. Nato conference series. Boston, MA: Springer.
Bartlett, F. C. (1932). Remembering: A study in experimental and social psychology. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Bornstein, B. (1998). From compassion to compensation: The effect of injury severity on mock jurors’ liability judgments. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28, 1477–1502.
Carlson, K. A. & Russo, J. E. (2001). Biased interpretation of evidence by mock jurors. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 7(2), 91–103. .https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-898X.7.2.91
Corrigan, P. W., Druss, B. G., & Perlick, D. A. (2014). The impact of mental illness stigma on seeking and participating in mental health care. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 15, 37–70.
Devine, D. J., Clayton, L. D., Dunford, B. B., Seying, R., & Pryce, J. (2001). Jury decision making: 45 years of empirical research on deliberating groups. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 7, 622–727. https://doi.org/10.1037//1076-8971.7.3.622.
Diamond, S. S., & Salerno, J. M. (2013). Empirical analysis of juries in tort cases. In J. Arlen (Ed.), Research Handbook on the Economics of Torts (pp. 414–435). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing LTD.
Du Mont, J., Miller, K.-L., & Myhr, T. L. (2003). The role of ‘real rape’ and ‘real victim’ stereotypes in the police reporting practices of sexually assaulted women. Violence Against Women, 9, 466–486. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801202250960.
Ellison, L., & Munro, V. E. (2009a). Turning mirrors into windows? Assessing the impact of (mock) juror education in rape trials. British Journal of Criminology, 49, 363–383. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azp013.
Ellison, L., & Munro, V. E. (2009b). Reacting to rape: Exploring mock jurors' assessments of complainant credibility. British Journal of Criminology, 2, 202–219. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azn077.
Fazio, R. H., Chen, J., McDonel, E. C., & Sherman, S. J. (1982). Attitude accessibility, attitude-behavior consistency, and the strength of the object-evaluation association. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 18, 339–357.
Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (Eds.) (2013). Representation in memory. In S. T. Fiske & S. E. Taylor (Eds.), Social cognition: From brains to culture (2nd ed.). London: SAGE Publishing.
Gentry, R. H., & Pickel, K. L. (2016). Jurors’ evaluations of a high school bullying case in which the victim attempted suicide. New Criminal Law Review, 19, 63–92. https://doi.org/10.1525/nclr.2016.19.1.63.
Glasman, L. R., & Albarracin, D. (2006). Forming attitudes that predict future behavior: A meta-analysis of the attitude-behavior relation. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 778–822.
Greene, E. (1989). On juries and damage awards: The process of decision making. Law and Contemporary Problems, 52, 225–246.
Greene, E., & Bornstein, B. H. (2003). Determining damages: The psychology of jury awards. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/10464-000.
Greene, E., Johns, M., & Bowman, J. (1999). The effects of injury severity on jury negligence decisions. Law and Human Behavior, 23, 675–693. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022341522713.
Hans, V. P. (2000). Business on trial: The civil jury and corporate responsibility. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Hans, V. P., & Vadino, N. (2007). After the crash: Citizens’ perceptions of connective-tissue injury lawsuits. Cornell Law Faculty Publications. Retrieved from http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/lsrp_papers/84.
Hart, A. J., Evans, D. L., Wissler, R. L., Feehan, J. W., & Saks, M. J. (1997). Injuries, prior beliefs, and damage awards. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 15, 63–82.
Holst, V. F., & Pezdek, K. (1992). Scripts for typical crimes and their effects on memory for eyewitness testimony. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 6, 573–587. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.2350060702.
Hope, L., Memon, A., & McGeorge, P. (2004). Understanding pretrial publicity: Predecisional distortion of evidence by mock jurors. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 10, 111–119. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-898X.10.2.11.
Huntley, J. E., & Costanzo, M. (2003). Sexual harassment stories: Testing a story-mediated model of juror decision-making in civil litigation. Law and Human Behavior, 27, 29–51. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021674811225.
Iverson, G. L., Lange, R. T. & Franzen, M. D. (2005). Effects of mild traumatic brain injury cannot be differentiated from substance abuse. Brain Injury, 19(1), 11–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699050410001720068.
Kovera, M. B. & Cass, S. A. (2002). Compelled mental health examinations, liability decisions, and damage awards in sexual harrassment cases: Issues for jury research. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 8(1), 96–114. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8971.8.1.96.
Krahe, B., Temkin, J., & Bieneck, S. (2007). Schema-driven information processing in judgements about rape. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 21, 601–619. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1297.
Krosnick, J. C., & Petty, R. A. (1995). Attitude strength: An overview. In R. E. Petty & J. A. Krosnick (Eds.), Attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences (pp. 1–24). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
LeGrand, C., & Leonard, F. (1979). Civil suits for sexual assault: Compensating rape victims. Golden Gate University Law Review, 8, 479–513 Available at: http://digitalcommons.law.ggu.edu/ggulrev/vol8/iss3/4.
McKimmie, B. M., Masser, B. M., & Bongiorno, R. (2014). What counts as rape? The effect of offense prototypes, victim stereotypes, and participant gender on how the complainant and defendant are perceived. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 29, 2273–2303. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260513518843.
Neisser, U. (1976). Cognition and reality. San Francisco: Freeman.
Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. (1986). Evidence evaluation in complex decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 242–258. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.51.2.242.
Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. (1988a). Explanation-based decision-making: Effects of memory structure on judgment. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 14, 521–533. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.14.3.521.
Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. (1988b). Explaining the evidence: Tests of the story model for juror decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 189–206. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.62.2.189.
Pennington, N. & Hastie, R. (1992). Explaining the evidence: Tests of the Story Model for juror decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62(2), 198–206. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.62.2.189.
Petty, R. E., & Krosnick, J. A. (1995). Attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Pichert, J. W., & Anderson, R. C. (1977). Taking different perspectives on a story. Journal of Educational Psychology, 69, 309–315.
Pickel, K. L., & Gentry, R. H. (2017). Mock jurors’ expectations regarding the psychological harm experienced by rape victims as a function of rape prototypicality. Psychology, Crime & Law, 23, 254–273. https://doi.org/10.1080/1098316X.2016.1239101.
Popovich, P. M., Jolton, J. A., Mastrangelo, P. M., Everton, W. J., Somers, J. M., & Gehlauf, D. N. (1995). Sexual harassment scripts: A means to understanding a phenomenon. Sex Roles, 32, 315–335. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01544600.
Reisberg, D. (2005). Cognition: Exploring the science of the mind (3rd Ed.). New York: W.W. Norton.
Robbennolt, J. (2000). Outcome severity and judgments of “responsibility”: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 30, 2575–2609. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2000.tb02451.x.
Rumelhart, D. E. (1980). Schemata: The building blocks of cognition. In R. J. Spiro, B. C. Bruce, & W. F. Brewer (Eds.), Theoretical issues in reading comprehension: Perspective from cognitive psychology, linguistics, artifical intelligence, and education (pp. 33–59). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Saks, M. J., Hollinger, L. A., Wissler, R. L., Evans, D. L., & Hart, A. J. (1997). Reducing variability in civil jury awards. Law and Human Behavior, 21, 243–256. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024834614312.
Schneider, K. T., Swan, S. & Fitzgerald, L. F. (1997). Job-related and psychological effects of sexual harassment in the workplace: Empirical evidence from two organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(3), 401–415. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.82.3.401.
Skeem, J. L., & Golding, S. L. (2001). Describing jurors' personal conceptions of insanity and their relationship to case judgments. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 7, 561–621. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8971.7.3.561.
Skorinko, J. L., & Spellman, B. A. (2013). Stereotypic crimes: How group-crime associations affect memory and (sometimes) verdicts and sentencing. Victims & Offenders, 8, 278–307. https://doi.org/10.1080/15564886.2012.755140.
Smith, D. (2007). The disordered and discredited plaintiff: Psychiatric evidence in civil litigation. Cardozo Law Review, 31, 750–822.
Smith, V. L. (1991). Prototypes in the courtroom: Lay representations of legal concepts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 857–872.
Smith, V. L. (1993). When prior knowledge and law collide: Helping jurors use the law. Law and Human Behavior, 17, 507–536. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01045071.
Smith, V. L., & Studebaker, C. A. (1996). What do you expect?: The influence of people's prior knowledge of crime categories on fact-finding. Law and Human Behavior, 20, 517–532. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01499039.
Vallano, J. P. (2013). Psychological injuries and legal decision making in civil cases: What we know and what we do not know. Psychological Injury and Law, 6, 99–112. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12207-013-9153-z.
Vallano, J. P., & McQuiston, D. E. (2018). An exploration of psychological and physical injury schemas in civil cases. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 32, 241–252. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3399.
Vallano, J. P., Winter, R. J., & Charman, S. (2012). Is this injury reasonable? Do psychological injury expectations affect mock jurors’ legal decisions in a sexual harassment case? Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 20, 834–852. https://doi.org/10.1080/13218719.2012.744626.
Venema, R. M. (2014). Police officer schema of sexual assault reports: Real rape, ambiguous cases, and false reports. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 31, 872–899. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260514556765.
Wiener, R. L., Richmond, T. L., Seib, H. M., Rauch, S. M., & Hackney, A. A. (2001). The psychology of telling murder stories: Do we think in scripts, exemplars, or prototypes? Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 20, 119–139. https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.476.
Wissler, R. L., Evans, D. L., Hart, A. J., Morry, M. M., & Saks, M. J. (1997). Explaining “pain and suffering” awards: The role of injury characteristics and fault attributions. Law and Human Behavior, 21, 181–207. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024878329333.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Vallano, J.P., Slapinski, K.A. The Impact of Psychological Injury Evidence and Jurors’ Schemas on Civil Case Decisions. Psychol. Inj. and Law 11, 362–369 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12207-018-9330-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12207-018-9330-1