A copy of this work was available on the public web and has been preserved in the Wayback Machine. The capture dates from 2017; you can also visit the original URL.
The file type is
Participants in two experiments acted as jurors for a personal-injury case containing different types of expert testimony. In both experiments, the defendant was more likely to obtain a verdict in his favor when his expert presented anecdotal case histories than when the expert presented experimental data. Participants' liability judgments were correlated with their perceptions of the experts' credibility (experiments 1 and 2) and were moderated somewhat by their need for cognition anddoi:10.1080/1068316030001629292 fatcat:qg524dr5mba7flst5xt6aa2cvi