并非所有的赔偿请求都一样：按日计费与一揽子计费对疼痛和痛苦赔偿裁决的影响。

All anchors are not created equal: the effects of Per Diem versus lump sum requests on pain and suffering awards.

机构信息

Department of Psychology, California State University, Northridge, 18111 Nordhoff Street, Northridge, CA 91330-8255, USA.

出版信息

Law Hum Behav. 2010 Apr;34(2):164-74. doi: 10.1007/s10979-009-9178-8. Epub 2009 May 22.

DOI:10.1007/s10979-009-9178-8

PMID:19462225

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.

摘要

本实验考察了与无损害赔偿请求相比，对同一损害赔偿请求（175,000 美元整付、每小时 10 美元、每天 240 美元、2 年每月 7300 美元）进行不同量化处理是否会影响疼痛和痛苦赔偿。符合陪审团资格的社区成员（N=180）阅读了一个模拟人身伤害案件，其中被告责任已经确定。赔偿情况为：（1）与每月 7300 美元和对照组相比，每小时 10 美元和 175,000 美元的条件下赔偿金额更大；（2）与每月 7300 美元和对照组相比，每小时 10 美元的条件下赔偿金额更具波动性。在对当事人、他们的律师或选择赔偿金额的难易程度的评价上没有差异。我们讨论了我们的数据对锚定和调整文献的理论意义，以及对法律专业人士的实际意义。