What’s the Story?

Explanations and Narratives in Civil Jury Decisions
  • Reid Hastie


Punitive Damage Corporate Greed Reckless Conduct Legal Element Story Model 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Anderson, T., & Twining, W. (1991). Analysis of evidence. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
  2. Gates, H.L. (1998). Thirteen ways of looking at a black man. New York: Vintage.Google Scholar
  3. Hart, H.L.A., & Honore, A.M. (1959). Causation in the law. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Hastie, R. (1999). The role of “stories” in civil jury judgments. Michigan Journal of Law Reform, 32(2), 1–13.Google Scholar
  5. Hastie, R., & Pennington, N. (1996). The O.J. Simpson stories: Behavioral scientists look at The People v. O.J. Simpson trial. University of Colorado Law Review, 67, 957–976.Google Scholar
  6. Hastie, R., & Pennington, N. (2000). Explanation-based decision making. In T. Connolly, H.R. Arkes, & K.R. Hammond (Eds.), Judgment and decision making: An interdisciplinary reader (2nd ed., pp. 212–228). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Hastie, R., Schkade, D.A., & Payne, J.W. (1998). A study of juror and jury judgments in civil cases: Deciding liability for punitive damages. Law and Human Behavior, 22, 287–314. (Also: Hastie, R., Schkade, D.A., & Payne, J.W. (1999). Reply to Vidmar. Law and Human Behavior, 23, 715–718)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Mauet, T.A. (1992). Fundamentals of trial techniques (3rd ed.) Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
  9. McKenzie, C.R.M., Lee, S.M., & Chen, K.K. (2002). When negative evidence increases confidence: Change in belief after hearing two sides of a dispute. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 15, 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Mixon, K.D., Foley, L.A., & Orme, K. (1995). The influence of racial similarity on the O.J. Simpson trial. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 10, 481–490.Google Scholar
  11. Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. (1981). Juror decision making models: The generalization gap. Psychological Bulletin, 89, 246–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. (1986). Evidence evaluation in complex decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 242–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. (1988). Explanation-based decision making: The effects of memory structure on judgment. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 14, 521–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. (1991). A cognitive theory of juror decision making: The Story Model. Cardozo Law Review, 13, 519–557.Google Scholar
  15. Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. (1992). Explaining the evidence: Tests of the story model for juror decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 189–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. (1993). Reasoning in explanation-based decision making. Cognition, 49, 123–163. (Reprinted in P.N. Johnson-Laird & E. Shafir (Eds.). (1994). Reasoning and decision making. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell)Google Scholar
  17. Roese, N.J., & Olson, J.M. (Ed.). (1995). What might have been: The social psychology of counterfactual thinking. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  18. Spellman, B.A. (1997). Crediting causality. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 126, 323–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Toobin, J. (1995). A horrible human event. The New Yorker, 40 (October 23), 41–49.Google Scholar
  20. Wells, G.L., & Gavanski, I. (1989). Mental simulation of causality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 161–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Reid Hastie
    • 1
  1. 1.Professor of Behavioral Science Graduate School of BusinessUniversity of ChicagoChicago

Personalised recommendations