The Ability to Understand Others’ Perspectives
I believe everyone is entitled to their opinion. This includes me. When conducting mock jury or other social psychological research, I almost always encourage the open expression of differing views by informing our research participants that “There are no wrong opinions or points of view.” I know some people who enjoy verbal sparring, however, I am not among them. I was brought up by loving parents who allowed me the freedom of sharing my point of view. They did not try to dissuade me, scold me, or tell me my opinion was wrong on the numerous occasions it differed from
Negligence Cases: Make Mental State Part of the Story
By Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm: Negligence is supposed to be a determination of action, not intention. Looking only at outward conduct, jurors in a negligence case are typically asked to decide whether an act, or a failure to act, was reasonable, and in line with what reasonable peers would have done in a similar situation. The intention or mental state of the actor is not supposed to matter in that determination. At least, that is what the law says. But among those who study jurors and other decision-makers, there has been a strong suspicion that this ignores a practical reality. Jurors
How do jurors apportion responsibility for harm in cases with multiple negligent actors? | Online Jury Research Update
Under the doctrines of contributory negligence and comparative negligence, the trier-of-fact -- most often a jury -- is responsible for apportioning responsibility for harm between multiple negligent actors. Votruba (2019) explored how jurors approach complex negligent tort cases in which responsibility can be attributed to multiple negligent actors, including a negligent plaintiff. Over 200 mock jurors read a vignette about a car accident that was constructed to allow attributions of responsibility for the accident to multiple causes including bad luck, road and weather conditions, the defendant and/or the plaintiff. Jurors read that....
Case Assessment: Check Your “Myside Bias”
By Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm: Trial lawyers arguably wear two hats. The first hat is that of the advocate — zealous, convinced, and laser-focused on their client’s best case. The other hat, though, belongs to the counsellor who assesses the case and advises the client — sober, grounded, and realistic. It takes the advocate’s hat to get through discovery and trial, but it takes the counsellor’s hat to weigh in on whether the case should be settled prior to trial. The two mindsets are obviously in conflict, but lawyers have the training and experience to set aside the adversarial mindset in
Pay Your Own Way Marketing
Marketing is a big topic. It covers many things including advertising, sales, strategy, research and more. It was one of my 3 undergraduate majors and though some things have changed, for example, the transition from traditional advertising to social media advertising, the basics have long been the same. Getting yourself or your company known for what you do, how you do it, and why your company should be hired or your product should be bought are the goals. In our world of selling a service, this entails demonstrating knowledge and expertise. One of the ways we have done this over
Pick Your Battles: The “Should We Concede Liability?” Checklist
By Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm: For some attorneys on the defense side of civil litigation, there can be something I call the “adversarial impulse,” which is the belief and behavior that, “If it can be denied, then deny it.” The most seasoned trial lawyers, however, know that it doesn’t always pay to fight every battle. Not only are some battles unlikely to be won, but fighting them can actually make your situation worse One area where practical strategy can often run up against this adversarial impulse is the decision on whether to concede liability. Sometimes that decision is patently obvious, and sometimes