title: Separating compensatory and punitive damage award decisions by trial bifurcation.
abstract: In a simulated products liability trial, we tested the effects of bifurcating decisions regarding compensatory and punitive damage awards. Fifty-nine groups of 5-7 jurors heard evidence in a unitary or bifurcated format, deliberated about the case to a unanimous decision, and awarded damages. Trial bifurcation decreased variability in compensatory damage awards across juries hearing the same case, and also decreased the tendency for juries to award extremely high compensatory damages. In addition, deliberation led to lower compensatory awards in the low injury severity condition and higher awards in the high injury severity condition. Jurors reported that they were using evidence more appropriately when the decisions were bifurcated. Implications of evidence bifurcation in civil trials are discussed.
authors.affiliation: University of Wyoming, Laramie, WY, USA. csheaada@uwyo.edu
authors.forename: Christine M
authors.initials: CM
authors.lastname: Shea Adams
authors.forename: Martin J
authors.initials: MJ
authors.lastname: Bourgeois
mesh_terms: D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D035881:Compensation and Redress / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D003657:Decision Making; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007600:Judgment; D016365:Liability, Legal / Q000191:economics*; D008297:Male; D015999:Multivariate Analysis; D011678:Punishment; D014481:United States