Free Daily Podcast Summary
The Litigation Psychology Podcast: Daily Summaries Delivered
by Courtroom Sciences
The Litigation Psychology Podcast presented by Courtroom Sciences, Inc. (CSI) is a podcast for in-house and outside defense counsel and insurance claims personnel about the intersection of science and litigation. We explore topics of interest to the defense bar, with a particular emphasis on subjects that don‘t get enough attention. Our hosts are experts in Clinical Psychology, Social Psychology, and scientifically-based jury research with a wealth of knowledge about psychology, science, jury research, human behavior, and decision making, which they apply in the context of civil litigation.
Latest Episodes
The most recent episodes — sign up to get AI-powered summaries of each one.
- 5 days ago25 min
#334 - The Problems with AI Jury Research
Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. talks about using AI for jury research. There are several limitations in the reliability and validity associated with using big data and AI jury research. The AI analysis is only as good as the data fed into it. The AI jury research offerings that are being promoted today lack reliability and validity due to the data that it is collecting, most of which is not venue specific. In order to achieve statistical significance, the amount of data required from each individual venue is much larger than what is available today. Additionally, any AI jury research or big data studies on specific cases cannot identify juror comprehension issues, juror emotional reactions, and juror confusion nor can it replicate the juror interactions that take place in deliberations. These missing elements have a direct impact on the validity of the data collected. A larger sample is not necessarily better - sample size is not useful with artificial stimuli. Serial focus groups are a much more useful data collection tool as they address all the limitations around venue, juror comprehension, juror interaction, juror confusion and allow for a much richer, deeper discussion with jurors to understand both the what and the why behind their feedback. Watch the video of this episode: https://youtu.be/bdtiG8YGqWM
- 1 weeks ago28 min
#333 - Procrastination = Risk
Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. shares a couple of stories of recent attorney inquiries for litigation consulting services at the very last minute because approval was not received from the client until days before trial. When authority for litigation consulting services comes late, it limits, and sometimes even completely prevents, the services from being scheduled due to other obligations. Waiting until the eve of trial is a poor and risky strategy. Discussing litigation consulting options early and preparing well in advance of mediation and trial is critical to increasing the odds of better litigation outcomes. Watch the video of this episode: https://youtu.be/P7ChblG403c
- 2 weeks ago24 min
#332 - The Concept of Measurement Sensitivity in Jury Research
Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. discusses the concept of sensitivity in jury research. Bill explains that the quality of the stimuli shared with participants in the research may impact the level of confidence in the research results. For example, when being able to show video footage of the incident or video of witness deposition testimony, these are high sensitivity stimuli that increase the reliability of the mock juror feedback. In contrast, if you only have written descriptions of the incident or witness deposition transcripts, the feedback from the jurors on those less sensitive stimuli will limit, to some degree, the confidence in the results. However, if you don't have video testimony or video of the incident, it does not mean you cannot still test what you do have. Making short videos of defense witnesses is a way to fill a video deposition gap. On the plaintiff side, if there's no deposition video, using social media of the plaintiff or other similar public media available can provide some useful insights from mock jurors. Gathering feedback based on the documentation you do have is still useful while recognizing that what jurors will see at trial will include stimuli that you were not able to test in the jury research. Watch the video of this episode here: https://youtu.be/HoCn8-10UIg
- 3 weeks ago43 min
#331 - Using Early Jury Research to Guide Discovery
CSI Litigation Consultant Sarah Burton, Ph.D. joins Steve Wood, Ph.D. to discuss early jury research. Sarah shares details about a case in which she conducted a focus group very early in the case, while discovery was still open, to understand what jurors thought about an important piece of evidence that the defense was expecting to base their case on. And it turned out that this evidence was not important to the jurors - they understood the evidence, however, they were not persuaded by it which led the defense team to have to rethink their strategy for discovery and beyond. Early jury research can help guide and inform what the legal team focuses on that matters to jurors vs. what they may assume is important or relevant. Sarah and Steve also touch on how they handle angry witnesses. Lastly, Steve and Sarah talk about the Test/Retest focus group format and how it aids in testing whether liability should be admitted or not, testing specific pieces of evidence that may or may not come in, testing anchors and counter-anchors, and more. Watch the video of this episode: https://youtu.be/MEtNtkNpKi8
- Sep 28, 202634 min
#330 - Conducting Jury Research on Highly Sensitive Cases
CSI Litigation Consultant Linda Khzam, M.A. joins Steve Wood, Ph.D. to talk about jury research in highly sensitive cases, such as sexual abuse and molestation, child abuse, racially sensitive situations like police shootings, etc. Linda and Steve discuss the challenges that jurors have in evaluating the evidence in sensitive cases and how the jury research has to be approached in these types of cases. The way in which the case is presented becomes critical in cases with sensitive situations so testing how the case is framed in a focus group is critically important to understanding what may trigger jurors and to gauge their reactions to what is being presented, and how. Steve and Linda also share their experiences with how juror's beliefs, attitudes, and experiences affect their interpretation of the evidence and how those with strong perspectives can influence other jurors and those who are afraid to share their opinion are influenced by them. They also talk about how to manage juror reactions to sensitive details in these cases and the emotional toll it can take on jurors to hear, see, and discuss highly unsettling evidence and case facts. Watch the video of this episode: https://youtu.be/7kDHLUg5WGo
- Sep 21, 202623 min
#329 - Reptile Question Sequencing - The Risk Is In The Setup
Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. talks about a deposition topic that doesn't get enough attention: the question sequencing in a Reptile deposition. Bill describes how the setup questions that precede the transition point to Reptile/Edge questions lull the witness's brain into a state of safety which prevents them from recognizing the subtle transition to the dangerous Reptile/Edge questions. The witness's brain becomes comfortable with the basic, simple, fact-based questions being asked and doesn't realize when the questions change from safe to risky. Most attorneys prepare their witnesses for the "standard" Reptile safety questions. What's missing is that these Reptile questions about safety are actually the secondary threat - the setup questions are the primary threat and this is what witnesses need to understand and be prepared for. Detecting the transition to the risky Reptile questions is difficult, however, with neurocognitive training, can be done. Watch the video of this episode: https://youtu.be/vNjF1kqzS8U
- Sep 14, 202651 min
#328 - The Do's and Don'ts of Jury Research in Medical Malpractice Cases
Sarah Burton, Ph.D. joins Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. to talk about some do's and don'ts of jury research in medical malpractice cases. Sarah's Don'ts: - Don't go into a focus group expecting to predict the verdict - the purpose of focus group research is to understand how jurors interpret the evidence and what does and does not resonate - Don't start your research with a mock trial - focus groups (exploratory research) should be the first step in jury research rather than mock trials which are confirmatory research projects - Don't argue or advocate in a focus group - the problem when not taking a neutral approach to the presentation is it invites presenter bias - Don't assume jurors understand what you are presenting - you must assess juror comprehension before diving into their feedback - Don't make assumptions about how witnesses will perform - testing each of your key witnesses with jurors in a focus group is critically important Sarah's Do's: - Do focus on the why behind the attitudes and perspectives the jurors are sharing - Do listen more than you talk - Do be balanced and neutral - Do video all witnesses at deposition to test in focus group jury research - Do test your case early and often - apply the scientific method Watch the video of this episode here: https://youtu.be/dT4Mh3RAXQ0
- Sep 7, 202640 min
#327 - Hot Seat and Trial Technology
James Smith, Senior Technology Consultant with IMS Legal Strategies, joins Steve Wood, Ph.D. to discuss trial tech. James describes his responsibilities as a Hot Seat operator before and during trial. James and Steve talk about the different ways that attorneys work, meeting their diverse expectations, and how he prepares for different scenarios at trial. James shares a couple of war stories from trials and also provides tips for attorneys on how to help make the process of working with Hot Seat operators as smooth and impactful as possible. Watch the video of this episode here: https://youtu.be/E4LMBv2IPus
Get The Litigation Psychology Podcast summaries in your inbox
Free AI-powered daily recaps. Key takeaways, quotes, and mentions — in a 5-minute read.
Get Free Summaries →Free forever for up to 3 podcasts. No credit card required.
You Might Also Like
Listeners also like.
Speaking of Psychology
Explores recent psychological research and its applications to daily life.
Stanford Psychology Podcast
Students interview psychologists about recent research and its real-world applications.
Above the Law - Thinking Like a Lawyer
Three legal experts analyze everyday topics through a legal lens, exploring how law shapes common experiences and cultural phenomena.
Psychology In Seattle Podcast
A psychology podcast offering educational and entertaining content.
American Law Cafe
Breaks down core legal concepts, landmark cases, and doctrines in clear, accessible discussions for law students and legal enthusiasts.
Vegas Law
A Las Vegas attorney and co-host explore criminal defense, personal injury, business law, and estate planning through real cases and legal analysis.
Civil Procedure
A podcast about Civil Procedure for law students and others interested in the subject.
Stanford Legal
Experts from Stanford Law explore constitutional law, voting rights, and landmark Supreme Court cases shaping democracy and civil rights.
In Session: Leading the Judiciary
Conversations with experts on leadership and management issues relevant to federal judiciary executives.
Let The Record Show
Explores the history and impact of major U.S. court cases that shape modern life.
Amicus With Dahlia Lithwick | Law, justice, and the courts
A weekly exploration of the U.S. Supreme Court, its justices, and the legal issues shaping American law and society.
The People’s Court Podcast
A retired judge mediates real civil disputes between individuals and businesses, offering binding rulings and legal insight.
About The Litigation Psychology Podcast
The Litigation Psychology Podcast presented by Courtroom Sciences, Inc. (CSI) is a podcast for in-house and outside defense counsel and insurance claims personnel about the intersection of science and litigation. We explore topics of interest to the defense bar, with a particular emphasis on subjects that don‘t get enough attention. Our hosts are experts in Clinical Psychology, Social Psychology, and scientifically-based jury research with a wealth of knowledge about psychology, science, jury research, human behavior, and decision making, which they apply in the context of civil litigation.
Customized Recaps
AI-powered recaps with compact key takeaways, quotes, and insights.
Straight to Your Inbox
Get key takeaways from The Litigation Psychology Podcast in a 5-minute read.
Save Hours Every Week
Stay current on your favorite podcasts without falling behind.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is Podzilla's The Litigation Psychology Podcast daily summary?
It's a free AI-powered email that summarizes new episodes of The Litigation Psychology Podcast as soon as they're published. You get the key takeaways, notable quotes, and links & mentions — all in a quick read.
How does the The Litigation Psychology Podcast podcast summary work?
When a new episode drops, our AI transcribes and analyzes it, then generates a personalized summary tailored to your interests and profession. It's delivered to your inbox every morning.
Is this an official The Litigation Psychology Podcast product?
No. Podzilla is an independent service that summarizes publicly available podcast content. We're not affiliated with or endorsed by Courtroom Sciences.
Can I get summaries of other podcasts too?
Absolutely! The free plan covers up to 3 podcasts, any in the catalog. Basic raises that to 15, Pro to 40 and Max to 100. Browse our full catalog at /podcasts.
How often does The Litigation Psychology Podcast release new episodes?
The Litigation Psychology Podcast publishes weekly. Our AI generates a summary within hours of each new episode.
What topics does The Litigation Psychology Podcast cover?
The Litigation Psychology Podcast covers topics including Science, Business, Social Sciences. Our AI identifies the specific themes in each episode and highlights what matters most to you.
Start getting The Litigation Psychology Podcast summaries tomorrow morning.
Free forever for up to 3 podcasts. No credit card required.
Free forever for up to 3 podcasts. No credit card required.