Abstract
A study was carried out to explore the effects of the level of economic damage awards on the amount of pain and suffering awards in a product liability litigation context. Two separate accident scenarios were presented to participants who were instructed to consider themselves in the role of jurors. One scenario involved a vehicle accident resulting in permanent quadriplegia and the other described a work place incident where an employee received chemical burns on 65% of his body. Two levels of economic damages were manipulated for each scenario as a between-participants variable. Following the presentation of each scenario, including the economic damages award, participants were asked to make a pain and suffering award. There were no constraints on the size of the awards. Results indicated significant differences in pain and suffering allocations for the two scenarios (means in dollars were: quad = 2.3 million, burn = 1.4 million). While mean pain and suffering awards were higher for the condition of higher economic damage awards (2.0 million) than for lower economic damage awards (1.5 million), the difference was not statistically significant. Substantial variance in the pain and suffering awards was also found, which poses interesting challenges to juries in reaching agreement on such awards.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.