Effects of product recall and the defense's closing argument on damages awarded by simulated juries

Abstract

Scope and Method of Study: This study shows the effects of product recall versus no recall and the defense's closing argument versus no closing argument on actual, punitive and total damages awarded by individual juror's and group juries. Additionally, individual jurors' attitudes are observed for each experimental treatment. The data are the written judgements of individual jurors and group juries. Subjects of the study were Oklahoma State University students enrolled. in introductory business law classes in the Fall of 1980. A two-by-two analysis of variance is utilized to determine main effects and interactions. Correlation Coefficients indicate the covariance between individual measures of damage awards and moan group awards. The t-tests show the significant differences between individual measures and mean group awards.

Findings and Conclusions: Lower total damages were awarded by both individuals and groups when the manufacturer had previously conducted a product recall than when no recall was made. The defense's closing argument, an attempt to minimize damage awards, was effective only if the manufacturer had conducted a recall. However, if no recall had been made, the closing argument call caused larger total damage awards than if no argument was included. The combination of recall and argument was most effective in minimizing damage awards. The largest total damages were awarded when the manufacturer failed to recall, and yet included the closing argument.