Lecci Len, Martin Alexia
Department of Psychology, University of North Carolina, Wilmington, Wilmington, NC, USA.
Psychiatr Psychol Law. 2018 Mar 20;25(4):522-538. doi: 10.1080/13218719.2018.1442628. eCollection 2018.
A total of 250 participants read a case summary and partial transcript including the expert testimony of a neuropsychologist who evaluated the plaintiff for a suspected mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) in a personal injury trial. There were three diagnostic conditions (organic injury, psychogenic reaction, or malingering) to which participants were randomly assigned, along with two requested award amounts ($10,000 or $5 million). Both pre- and postdeliberation effects emerged for the diagnosis (largest awards for the organic mTBI condition) and for the award request (larger requests resulted in larger awards), with the effect size for award request being substantially larger than the clinical diagnosis. A significant interaction also emerged, whereby the effect of the clinical diagnosis was only present when the award request was large. Thus, factors that are potentially less relevant to pain and suffering (award request) may disproportionately impact mock juror decisions in personal injury trials relative to factors that should be more salient (the expert witness's diagnosis). However, the award request had no impact on mock juror perceptions of the injury's life impact, sympathy for the plaintiff, or perceived plaintiff credibility, but the diagnosis did influence these outcomes. Implications for civil litigation in mTBI trials are discussed.
共有250名参与者阅读了一份案例摘要和部分庭审记录，其中包括一名神经心理学家的专家证词，该专家在一场人身伤害审判中对原告是否患有疑似轻度创伤性脑损伤（mTBI）进行了评估。参与者被随机分配到三种诊断情况（器质性损伤、心理性反应或诈病），以及两种要求的赔偿金额（1万美元或500万美元）。审议前和审议后的效应在诊断方面（器质性mTBI情况的赔偿金额最高）和赔偿要求方面（要求的赔偿金额越高，赔偿金额越大）均有出现，赔偿要求的效应大小远大于临床诊断。还出现了显著的交互作用，即只有当赔偿要求较高时，临床诊断的效应才会显现。因此，在人身伤害审判中，与痛苦和折磨可能不太相关的因素（赔偿要求）相对于应该更突出的因素（专家证人的诊断），可能会对模拟陪审员的决定产生不成比例的影响。然而，赔偿要求对模拟陪审员对损伤对生活影响的认知、对原告的同情或对原告可信度的认知没有影响，但诊断确实会影响这些结果。本文讨论了mTBI审判中民事诉讼的影响。
