Why winners win: Decision making in medical malpractice cases

被引:2
作者
Crawford, Linda S. [1 ]
机构
[1] Amer Bar Assoc, Harvard Law Sch, Chicago, IL 60611 USA
关键词
EXPERT;
D O I
10.5435/00124635-200700001-00016
中图分类号
R826.8 [整形外科学]; R782.2 [口腔颌面部整形外科学]; R726.2 [小儿整形外科学]; R62 [整形外科学(修复外科学)];
学科分类号
摘要
A high percentage of physicians will, at some time in their careers, face a lawsuit, possibly finding themselves in the courtroom even when they have not made a medical mistake. Despite the presumption that juries are biased in favor of injured plaintiffs, physicians win most of their trials. Why this occurs and how juries make their decisions are topics of ongoing interest. Research has been done on jury decision making, including what, if any, the roles of race and sex play in the process. It is essential that those who enter the courtroom understand both the power they have to influence the outcome of their own trials and why it is that issues of character continue to be so important to juries.
引用
收藏
页码:S70 / S74
页数:5
相关论文
共 34 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], MED MALPRACTICE AM J
[2]  
ARON R, 1986, TRIAL COMMUNICATION, P536
[3]   Believability of expert and lay witnesses: Implications for trial consultation [J].
Boccaccini, MT ;
Brodsky, SL .
PROFESSIONAL PSYCHOLOGY-RESEARCH AND PRACTICE, 2002, 33 (04) :384-388
[4]  
Chadee D., 1996, CARIBBEAN J CRIMINOL, V1, P59
[5]   The "hired gun" effect: Assessing the effect of pay, frequency of testifying, and credentials on the perception of expert testimony [J].
Cooper, J ;
Neuhaus, IM .
LAW AND HUMAN BEHAVIOR, 2000, 24 (02) :149-171
[6]  
CRAWFORD L, 1999, MED MALPRACTICE LAW, V16, P4
[7]  
CRAWFORD LS, 1999, MED MALPRACTICE LAW, V16, P1
[8]  
DAHL D, 2006, KANSAS CITY DAI 0510
[9]   Jury decision making - 45 years of empirical research on deliberating groups [J].
Devine, DJ ;
Clayton, LD ;
Dunford, BB ;
Seying, R ;
Pryce, J .
PSYCHOLOGY PUBLIC POLICY AND LAW, 2001, 7 (03) :622-727
[10]  
*FED INS CORP COUN, 1991, HANDL SYMP JURY TRIA