The Litigation Psychology Podcast

The Litigation Psychology Podcast - Episode 134 - Insights for Effective Jury Selection

Dr. Steve Wood shares his observations, insights, and experience with jury selection and what works and doesn't work when picking a jury. Steve talks about the dangers of selecting a jury based solely on demographics and the criticality of learning about a juror's experiences, attitudes, and beliefs. He emphasizes the importance of the specific questions asked and approach taken by the attorney during voir dire and recommends that counsel treat voir dire more like a focus group and dig deeper into juror responses. Get potential jurors talking to explain and express their beliefs and attitudes to figure out if they are a good juror for your side. Steve also cautions attorneys on social desirability bias which is the tendency of some jurors to give answers that make the person look good and which may be concealing their real feelings or attitudes. He suggests digging as much as feasible into juror responses and the details in their answers as a way to help support your position for striking for cause, if necessary. Watch the video of this episode: https://www.courtroomsciences.com/r/GG1

The Litigation Psychology Podcast - Episode 133 - 13 Cognitive Distortions Crippling Your Witness - Part 3

In the final part of this three-part topic, Dr. Bill Kanasky, Jr. and Dr. Steve Wood discuss the last of the 13 cognitive distortions that cripple witnesses during testimony. Cognitive distortions are irrational thinking patterns where the brain makes connections that may or may not exist and can negatively impact testimony performance unless corrected via cognitive reframing. The cognitive distortions Bill and Steve discuss in this episode are: 11) Emotional reasoning - when witnesses’ emotional thinking replaces their logical thinking. Also known as “amygdala hijack,” (i.e., the fight or flight response) 12) Control fallacies - when witnesses believe they have no control over the testimony process, feel powerless during testimony, and often assume a submissive role in the question-and-answer interaction. 13) Fallacy of fairness - when witnesses believe the lawsuit isn’t “fair,” leading to intense feelings of anger and resentment and impacting their ability to deliver effective deposition testimony. All 13 of these cognitive distortions can be overcome through a neurocognitive assessment and training that addresses each individually. Watch the video of this episode: https://www.courtroomsciences.com/r/yxN

The Litigation Psychology Podcast - Episode 132 - Lessons Learned from Successful Plaintiff Attorneys

Dr. Bill Kanasky, Jr. shares his experience working with plaintiff attorneys on cases. Bill works on the plaintiff's side when a corporation, which is typically the defendant, is the plaintiff and engages Courtroom Sciences for litigation consulting. This type of work has led to some very specific learnings about how plaintiff attorneys in commercial litigation operate and behave. Four key characteristics of successful plaintiff attorneys:
1) their desire to win is unmatched and often higher than the defense side;2) they actively and consistently use focus groups and mock trials, and in particular, employ the test/retest methodology to tweak and adjust their case to improve it, leading to much higher accuracy and confidence;3) they conduct their jury research as early as possible in the timeline of the case, allowing it to help them guide their discovery when it comes to case themes, case facts, witnesses, etc.;  4) they are very open to, and actively solicit, constructive criticism and feedback from consultants in order to help make them better attorneys.
Watch the video of this episode: https://www.courtroomsciences.com/r/G4a

The Litigation Psychology Podcast - Episode 131 - Advantages and Importance of Early Case Management

Mike Bassett, Senior Partner, The Bassett Law Firm joins Dr. Bill Kanasky, Jr. and Dr. Steve Wood to talk about early case management, the timing of working up a case, and what is best to do first and early. Early case management sets the tempo and helps gain momentum for the defense. Mike shares how in the first 30-60 days of a case conducting focus groups always him to know what resonates with jurors and what doesn't and the value of interviewing witnesses early. Mike talks about how defense attorneys need to educate their clients and carriers on why they need to be investing in this early case management, research, and witness prep. There is significant, tangible value in having juror perspectives while discovery is still open and before witnesses have testified. The plaintiff's bar tests cases at an exponentially higher rate than the defense bar and will test discrete issues to learn what will resonate with jurors. Bill, Steve, and Mike also discuss the characteristics of strong plaintiff attorneys: always pushing the file; always have a plan; develop their themes early; focus group cases early; create maximum risk and leverage in every deposition; are detailed oriented and very prepared. Watch the video of this episode: https://www.courtroomsciences.com/r/OVJ

The Litigation Psychology Podcast - Episode 130 - Tips for Success for Trial Attorneys & Aspiring Associates

Paul Motz, Shareholder, Segal McCambridge Singer & Mahoney, joins the podcast to talk about what it takes to become a successful trial attorney. Finding good associates is a challenge these days. A couple of reasons for this is the job-hopping of associates in pursuit of a bigger paycheck and also the shift in people wanting to find more work-life balance. But Paul points out that being a trial attorney requires a different schedule and a different mentality. So what can trial attorneys do to better prepare their associates? Attorneys must treat their associates right and provide them with lots of opportunities to learn and grow. Trial attorneys should include their aspiring associates in as much of the case that makes sense and think about how to build rapport, camaraderie, and connection with their associates. Allow them opportunities to take ownership in specific situations and help associates understand that constantly switching firms is short-sighted because for a trial attorney, having an associate you can count on is invaluable. Associates who aspire to be a successful trial attorney must be willing to work hard and show initiative and take advantage of every opportunity offered to them. Watch the video of this episode: https://www.courtroomsciences.com/r/0ek 

The Litigation Psychology Podcast - Episode 129 - 13 Cognitive Distortions Crippling Your Witness - Part 2

In the second of a multi-part topic, Dr. Steve Wood and Dr. Bill Kanasky, Jr. discuss irrational thinking patterns. Steve and Bill describe how the brain makes connections that may or may not be connected in reality and how that type of irrational thinking can impact witness performance, requiring cognitive reframing to correct these irrational thinking patterns. Bill and Steve have identified 13 cognitive distortions that are crippling your witnesses and cover five additional distortions in this episode: 5) Catastrophizing – when your witness over-exaggerates the value of negative facts in the case, which leads to extreme anxiety; 6) Personalization – when your witness takes the litigation very personally, forgetting that plaintiff’s counsel is primarily focused on money; 7) Blaming – when your witness refuses to take any responsibility for their own actions or decisions, and instead blames others at the company or even the plaintiff; 8) Labeling – when your witness assigns a judgment to themselves based on one negative incident, instead of recognizing that no one is perfect, and that people can make honest mistakes; 9) Always being right – when your witness has the emotional need to always be right and/or to have an answer to everything; 10) 'Should' statements – when your witness falls into the trap of second guessing themselves regarding past conduct or decision. Watch the video of this episode: https://www.courtroomsciences.com/r/Tib

The Litigation Psychology Podcast - Episode 128 - Expert Insights from a Seasoned Expert Witness

Kevin Quinley, President of Quinley Risk Associates, talks about his extensive experience in the insurance industry and particularly as an expert witness. Bill and Kevin discuss several tips for attorneys on issues that arise when Kevin is requested to serve as an expert witness, including: last minute scheduling; failing to succinctly frame key issues and not being specific about what's needed from the expert witness; expectations of an immediate opinion from the expert witness after sharing only minimal information; and price resistance. Lastly, Kevin shares his thoughts on how younger attorneys can get more trial experience. Watch the video of this episode: https://www.courtroomsciences.com/r/M43

The Litigation Psychology Podcast - Episode 127 - Law Enforcement and Healthcare Witness Preparation

Joe Longfellow, Partner & Trial Attorney with Andrew, Crabtree, Knox & Longfellow, joins the podcast to talk about his work on civil rights defense cases primarily defending law enforcement officers, and also working with healthcare witnesses in med mal cases. Joe describes the challenges of witness prep of law enforcement and how he works with these often difficult witnesses. He also shares his approach to helping jurors understand the difference between negligence and deliberate indifference. Bill and Joe share their thoughts on preparing witnesses, the role that prior testimony plays in new litigation and how to prepare and handle, the goal of a witness at deposition, and more. Watch the video of this episode: https://www.courtroomsciences.com/r/QHO

The Litigation Psychology Podcast - Episode 126 - Answering with ”It depends” During Testimony

Baxter Drennon, Partner with Hall Booth Smith, joins the podcast to talk about responses to Reptile Theory questions, in particular the answer of "It depends." This response can make some defense attorneys uncomfortable. Steve, Bill, and Baxter discuss the circumstances in which "It depends" is the truthful and most accurate response. They talk about the validity and comfort of a witness varying their responses and what cognitive factors are involved in the way a question is responded to. Baxter shares the approach he takes with his witnesses and the importance of identifying the purpose of the deposition as a way to manage responses. The group talk about the dangers and risks of a witness pivoting when responding to opposing counsel questions, as well as, the opportunity and considerations with a follow-up question to an "It depends" response. Lastly, Steve, Bill, and Baxter discuss the necessity of educating witnesses on the strategy of the case, for them to understand the roles of the witness and the attorney, and what jurors respond to, positively and negatively, when hearing witness testimony. Watch the video of this episode: https://www.courtroomsciences.com/r/hLQ

The Litigation Psychology Podcast - Episode 125 - 13 Cognitive Distortions Crippling Your Witness - Part 1

In the first of a multi-part topic, Dr. Steve Wood and Dr. Bill Kanasky, Jr. discuss irrational thinking patterns. Steve and Bill describe how the brain makes connections that may or may not be connected in reality and how that type of irrational thinking can impact witness performance, requiring cognitive reframing to correct these irrational thinking patterns. Bill and Steve have identified 13 cognitive distortions that are crippling your witnesses and cover four of these distortions in this episode:
1) Polarized thinking - this type of thinking occurs when your witness feels they have to be perfect as a witness;
2) Mental filtering - when a witness magnifies negative aspects of the case and ignores or discounts positive facts;
3) Overgeneralization - this happens when your witness focuses on a single negative event from the past and makes an extreme conclusion that all other events in the future will be negative;
4) Jumping to conclusions - your witness is convinced that there is no chance at obtaining a favorable trial verdict or settlement.
Watch the video of this episode: https://www.courtroomsciences.com/r/ImG