<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Jury Appeal &#187; Uncategorized</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.juryappeal.com/category/uncategorized/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.juryappeal.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 03 Jan 2011 15:20:31 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>The Brain Is a SOCIAL Organ?</title>
		<link>http://www.juryappeal.com/2010/02/24/the-brain-is-a-social-organ/</link>
		<comments>http://www.juryappeal.com/2010/02/24/the-brain-is-a-social-organ/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Feb 2010 16:13:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.juryappeal.com/?p=112</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Modern neuroscience research continues to point to the brain as a highly social organ.  But what does that mean?  The brain needs interaction to develop, to learn how to be a brain!  It learns how to modulate emotions, solve problems, and guide behavior, through experience with the environment.  Now for some of you this will [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Modern neuroscience research continues to point to the brain as a highly social organ.  But what does that mean?  The brain needs interaction to develop, to learn how to be a brain!  It learns how to modulate emotions, solve problems, and guide behavior, through experience with the environment.  Now for some of you this will be obvious, but the repercussions of this when applied to witnesses testifying are not.  How a witness is prepared to testify needs to take into account this fact.  The truth is that most witnesses have little experience with any part of the specific legal role they are going to be asked to assume.  Even more concerning is that many times the witness is being asked to relive stressful or painful events in their past.  Just the anticipatory stress of this is enough to have manifestation of all types of inappropriate behavior.</p>
<p>The witness preparation protocol must incorporate the opportunity for interactions that will allow the witness&#8217;s brain to learn how to be an effective witness, how to handle the stress of testifying, and how to tell a story on the witness stand.  Our advantage is the human brain is a remarkable organ that adapts quickly.  We use that remarkable adaptation function by creating a protocol that quickly brings to bear the important interactions needed to create the best, most authentic, witness testimony possible.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.juryappeal.com/2010/02/24/the-brain-is-a-social-organ/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Jurors Weigh Experience Over Observation</title>
		<link>http://www.juryappeal.com/2010/02/03/jurors-weigh-experience-over-observation/</link>
		<comments>http://www.juryappeal.com/2010/02/03/jurors-weigh-experience-over-observation/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Feb 2010 17:12:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.juryappeal.com/?p=94</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Research published by Dan Ariely, et al.  of Predictably Irrational fame, provides another strike to the theory of rational decision making.  When making decisions we suffer from two distinct biases.  The first is that we give more weight to our own experience than to observation.  This suggests a heavy emotional component to decision making. The [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.predictablyirrational.com/pdfs/tree.pdf" target="_blank">Research published</a> by Dan Ariely, et al.  of <a href="http://www.predictablyirrational.com/?page_id=6" target="_blank"><em>Predictably Irrational</em></a> fame, provides another strike to the theory of rational decision making.  When making decisions we suffer from two distinct biases.  The first is that we give more weight to our own experience than to observation.  This suggests a heavy emotional component to decision making.</p>
<p>The second is recency bias.  Things we experience and observe in our immediate past have more currency than those that happened in the distant past.  This is why we are so bad at understanding risk.  When the stock market is going up, we can&#8217;t imagine it will go down and when it is going down we can&#8217;t imagine it going up.</p>
<p>When your witness is on the stand testifying, jurors will judge their credibility first by looking at their own immediate experiences.  This will evoke either a positive or negative emotional reaction that will override the actual words of the testimony or put differently they will judge the witnesses words based on an emotional reaction from their own immediate experience.</p>
<p>That is why it is so critical that your witness connect emotionally with jurors.  Even if the jurors has no direct experience that is similar to the witness, they will find a recent experience that in their mind correlates and use the emotional valence from that to make judgments of credibility and likeability.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.juryappeal.com/2010/02/03/jurors-weigh-experience-over-observation/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

