By Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm: Supporters of America’s traditional jury trials like the idea of a system of conflict resolution based on evidence, reasoning, and the public’s judgment. Those supporters, and I include myself in that group, believe that something is being lost when nearly all disputes that are candidates for such a system are instead […]
Address the Off-Stage Character in Your Trial Story: Settlement Read More »
By Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm: These are trying times for those of us who are looking to see whether American rule of law can survive its current challenges. As our executive branch tests the limits of Congressional authority, and bucks the traditions of judicial review, the question that’s up in the air at the moment is
Expect Low Legal Comprehension Read More »
By Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm: Every trial lawyer I know believes that they are adapting their communication in order to get the jury — or, for that matter, the judge — to understand. At the same time, they will still try to be concise, correct, and specific. Sometimes, the competing demands can lead lawyers into speaking
Avoid Legalese, and Other ‘Magic Spells’ Read More »
By Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm: In our increasingly digital world, the idea of taking notes the old-fashioned way with paper and pen can feel quaint. Yet, many of us still do it. For those jurors who are permitted to take notes, they are almost certainly doing it the old-fashioned way. New research, however, continues to demonstrate
Encourage Juror Note-Taking (and Take Notes Yourselves) Read More »
By Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm: There’s a stereotype of what happens in jury deliberations. It involves jurors squaring off against each other, a hail of fierce argument and counter-argument, with the jurors turning themselves into proxy attorneys for their side as other wavering members are converted or confirmed: Think “Twelve Angry Men” with greater demographic diversity.
By Dr. Ken Broda Bahm: Many years ago, when I was still an academic and moving into the field of litigation consulting, I used to coach debate. Recently, a friend from that time told me that he is now coaching a program that includes a lot of inexperienced judges, including parents, and asked if I
Adapt: Don’t ‘Dumb it down’ but do dial it in Read More »
By Dr. Ken Broda Bahm: For anyone analyzing audiences and preparing persuasive messages, it helps to know about what is called “System 1” and “System 2” thinking. When we make decisions that are pretty quick and automatic, with little reflection, cognitive work, or even necessarily voluntary awareness, then we are using System 1. When we
Get Your Jurors to Take the Tougher Path Read More »
By Dr. Ken Broda Bahm: Some attorneys seem to have a natural ability to make themselves understood. They are able to connect with their audience while laying out central points that are clear, resonant, and influential. Other attorneys may be just as organized, prepared, and ultimately accurate…but still not able to get jurors to that point
Loop Back and Reinforce the Punchline Read More »
By Dr. Ken Broda Bahm: Recognizing and reducing bias is obviously essential in a litigation context. But when it comes to “de-biasing,” it helps to see instructions as one tool in the toolbox, but not a tool that’s guaranteed to fix everything. In a recent post, I wrote about a pre-instruction on hindsight that shows some
Be Cautious About Instructing Your Way Out of Bias Read More »
By Dr. Ken Broda Bahm: Here’s an intuitive belief that many who work in the field of law might adhere to: More information leads to better decisions. Those who work in the social sciences, however, know that this does not always hold true. Based on the higher “cognitive load,” higher levels of information can also
Testimony Mode: Note the Tradeoff Between Information Density and Juror Sensitivity Read More »