The Litigation Psychology Podcast

Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. and Steve Wood, Ph.D. answer another batch of podcast viewer and listener questions:

• When is the right time to conduct a focus group—should I wait until discovery is complete?

• Can I test my opening statement in front of staff members or family?

• Why is it important to test opening statements with mock jurors?

• Should a consultant or moderator sit inside the jury deliberation room during a mock trial?

• What are the most common trial mistakes defense attorneys make in opening statements, voir dire, and cr...

Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. breaks down why the single most powerful testimony tool in depositions and trial is the disciplined use of “No” or “I disagree”, followed by silence. Bill explains how witnesses get into trouble when they add explanations after a comma (“No, because…”), which leads to defensive or evasive answers and creates damaging credibility issues. Instead, he emphasizes a strategy rooted in cognitive science: reject the premise cleanly, elevate tone and composure, and force opposing counsel into an open-ended follow-up like “Why?”, which gives the witness more time to think and respond from the logical (not emotional) part of...

Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. expands on the “disruptive voir dire” approach, focusing on how to neutralize juror confirmation bias, which is one of the most dangerous psychological forces in the courtroom, and in life. Bill explains why all humans are hardwired to make rapid, belief-driven judgments and how those cognitive shortcuts can lock jurors into the plaintiff’s narrative before the defense even begins its case.

He outlines a structured voir dire method that exposes confirmation bias directly. Bill emphasizes the importance of normalizing confirmation bias through the sharing of personal examples and guiding jurors to reflec...

In this episode, Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. explains why most defense teams misuse jury research by relying solely on a single mock trial and skipping the exploratory phase required by the scientific method for validity and reliability. Bill breaks down how early focus groups are critical in revealing juror confusion, hidden vulnerabilities in your case, and dangerous misconceptions that mock trials are unable to uncover. He also emphasizes that early exploratory research can shape discovery, expert strategy, themes, and voir dire long before mediation or trial.

Bill warns that when defense teams skip this exploratory step...

Steve Wood, Ph.D. and Linda Khzam, M.A. break down the topic of hindsight bias and its impact on juror decision-making. They explain how learning an outcome makes jurors believe it was predictable all along, leading to exaggerated foreseeability and unrealistic expectations of what defendants “should have known.”

Steve and Linda discuss how hindsight bias appears across different case types from trucking and transportation to incidents involving police officers to decades-old sexual assault and molestation cases where jurors often apply modern norms and knowledge to past events. They also highlight how technology, especially video evidence, further expa...

Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. discusses a recurring problem in wrongful death cases: jurors’ tendency to mistakenly believe their job is to assign a monetary value to a life. Bill explains how this cognitive shortcut often leads to inflated damage awards because jurors default to emotional reasoning rather than following the legal instructions.

To prevent this, Bill emphasizes that the issue must be addressed proactively during voir dire. He outlines a process that begins with exposing the problem - acknowledging that jurors will naturally think, “How do we put a value on a life?” - and then clearl...

Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. talks about several issues he sees with opening statements. Bill highlights the biggest issue the CSI team comes across in opening statements: starting the opening statement in the wrong spot. Bill emphasizes the importance of the first two minutes of the opening and how those first two minutes frame how you want the jury to see your case (i.e., the cognitive lens.) The first thing that the defense attorney has to do in their opening is put someone or something else on trial, state emphatically what the case is about, and not talk...

Bill Kanasky, Jr. Ph.D. shares a comparison between two different performances by witnesses at a recent mock trial and how their deposition performance impacted jurors' perceptions of the credibility of the witnesses and jurors' views of the case. One of the witnesses gave several pivoting responses, using phrases like "Yeah, but...." many times, which the jurors found evasive and did not like. Bill talks about how to handle situations where witnesses are asked questions related to bad facts or potentially problematic information and describes a much better approach than pivoting or arguing with the questioning attorney. Bill emphasizes...

Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. talks about what attorneys and defendants get wrong about jury research. Defense teams that follow the traditional jury research model and only conduct mock trials ignore the scientific method. If you want results you can have confidence in, you have to follow the proven scientific method. Bill describes the two biggest issues with mock trials:

- conducting a mock trial as the first, and often only, research project invites a significant amount of error into your results, risking false positives and false negatives

- mock trials are built on argument...

Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. discusses setting proper expectations when it comes to managing litigation and the relationship between each element in litigation. For example, Bill highlights that success in trial depends on a constellation of factors, not just one element like jury selection, and that defense teams often place too much weight on a single component while neglecting others. He explains that having a consultant present for jury selection without supporting jury research is ineffective, comparing it to a surgeon operating without diagnostic scans. Meaningful jury selection requires data to build juror profiles and well-structured, insightful questions and...

In this episode of The Litigation Psychology Podcast, Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. discusses confirmation bias and its destructive impact on litigation decision-making. He explains that confirmation bias — when attorneys or claims professionals interpret case facts in ways that support their preexisting beliefs — is one of the most dangerous cognitive traps in civil litigation. Plaintiff attorneys have recognized this risk in their own thinking and combat it through early and consistent jury research, conducting multiple focus groups throughout case development to uncover blind spots and test themes.

Bill contrasts this with defense teams that often rely on gut...

Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. breaks down two critical mistakes attorneys make in opening statements: dilution of their message and their communication frequency. Frequency refers to the attorney’s delivery dynamics - energy level, confidence, rhythm, and emotional tone - that either engages jurors or turns them off. Common problems with communication frequency include defensiveness, nervousness, over-talking, and coming across as if trying to sell something to the jury rather than telling them a compelling story. Dilution occurs when attorneys talk too long, over-explain, or defend unnecessarily, which weakens the message and causes jurors to tune out. Bill explains wh...

In this episode of the Litigation Psychology Podcast, Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. talks about common missteps in litigation and explains why defense teams must “stop losing before they can start winning.” He argues that many losses stem not from case facts but from preventable mistakes, as the plaintiff’s bar continues to be proactive while the defense often remains reactive.

Bill highlights three key areas for improvement: early and accurate case assessment via frequent jury research, early witness evaluation to address psychological and emotional issues, and early deposition preparation using neurocognitive remapping and systematic desensitization to ensure...

Trucking defense attorneys Shane O'Dell and Larry Hall join hosts Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. and Steve Wood, Ph.D. to talk through several topics in trucking and transportation litigation. They begin by discussing the devastating illegal U-turn trucking accident in Florida resulting in multiple fatalities and the political fallout due to immigration issues with the driver. The group talk about how to address this horrible accident in jury selection and how to solicit honest perspectives from jurors about the trucking industry in order to identify biased jurors. Next the group discuss the need for the defense to be...

Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. and Steve Wood, Ph.D. discuss the most common mistakes attorneys make during litigation touching on jury research, voir dire, direct examination, openings, and closings.

Bill and Steve stress that in jury research, confirmation bias is a major pitfall and attorneys often dismiss unfavorable results instead of using them to prepare for trial. They also highlight how waiting too long to conduct research is another mistake, as early testing reveals vulnerabilities before they become entrenched. In voir dire, many attorneys aren't vulnerable with jurors and also don't go deep enough with their...

In this episode, Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. is joined by attorneys Johan Flynn and Kevin Greene to discuss their recent nine-week asbestos trial in California that resulted in a major defense verdict. Johan and Kevin describe how they incorporated CSI’s disruptive voir dire techniques into their jury selection strategy, using them to identify unfavorable jurors, plant seeds on critical defense themes, and introduce concepts such as anchoring early in the process.

They also share insights on trial strategy, including coordinating with co-defendants, refining opening slides after judicial rulings, and carefully managing cross-examinations. Both emphasize the im...

Trucking defense attorney Doug Marcello joins Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. to discuss the latest in trucking litigation. Doug provides a “state of the union” update on where the industry has been, where it is now, and where it needs to go. They address recent tort reform efforts in states like Georgia, Louisiana, and South Carolina, and the importance of leveraging those reforms effectively. An important point that Doug and Bill highlight is the continued lack of collaboration among defense attorneys compared to the highly coordinated plaintiff’s bar, which continues to share strategies nationwide.

Doug and Bill e...

Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. talks about the role of juror beliefs and attitudes in voir dire and why they must be treated as distinct concepts. Beliefs are what jurors think (cognitive), while attitudes are how they feel (emotional). Bill emphasizes that while many attorneys stop at/after belief-based questions, it’s the follow-up attitude questions that reveal the real risk, since emotions ultimately drive juror decision-making.

Bill gives an example of the sequence: start with belief questions such as “Do you think corporations put profits over safety?” and then follow up with attitude questions like “How do you f...

Steve Wood, Ph.D. is joined by trial attorney Jeremiah Byrne of Frost Brown Todd LLC to break down a recent case that resulted in a defense verdict. Jeremiah begins with an overview of the facts, explaining the allegations against the defendant and the damages sought by the plaintiff. He describes the mediation process, the plaintiff’s settlement demands, and why the case proceeded to trial.

Next, Steve and Jeremiah discuss jury selection strategy, including how Jeremiah identified potential pro-defense and pro-plaintiff jurors, developed voir dire questions, and approached strikes. He and Steve walk through key themes fr...

Steve Wood, Ph.D. joins Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. to answer recent podcast viewer and listener mail.

• In voir dire, should defense counsel ask jurors about their AI use and habits?

• The judge has only given both sides, three to five questions, max, in jury selection. What do I do?

• How can you manage judge conducted voir dire?

• How do I counter-anchor in my opening statement if the plaintiff attorney doesn’t give a specific number but they just say that they want a large amount from the jurors?

• What a...

Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. dives into an often overlooked but critical aspect of witness testimony: behavior. He explains that body language and facial expression are the first things jurors process when evaluating a witness on video, and they play a major role in shaping perceptions of credibility, likability, and trustworthiness. Bill urges attorneys to coach their witnesses to maintain “job interview” demeanor — sitting upright, hands in front, and wearing a neutral, professional facial expression throughout the course of the entire deposition.

Bill emphasizes the importance of behavioral feedback during prep, not just strategic or content-based feedback. Emotio...

In this episode of The Litigation Psychology Podcast, Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. dives into the rapidly evolving world of plaintiff attorney advertising and specifically how it's exploded on social media. While traditional ads like billboards and cheesy daytime TV spots are still around, many plaintiff firms are now taking a totally different approach online. Bill explains how these firms are using TikTok, Instagram, and X (formally Twitter) to push out videos that aren’t focused on big verdicts or settlements, but rather aimed at shaping public opinion and, ultimately, juror attitudes.

Bill breaks these videos down in...

Trial attorney Shane O’Dell from Naman Howell joins Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. to break down a recent case that resulted in a complete defense verdict. The case involved a homeowner being sued after a contractor’s assistant, hired informally from a parking lot, fell through an attic floor while replacing water heaters, sustaining serious injuries. Shane explains how initial assumptions about homeowner liability posed a major challenge, as jurors often believe that property owners are automatically responsible for any accidents on their premises.

Shane and Bill walk through how narrative strategy played a crucial role in t...

Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. explains how cortisol, the brain’s primary stress hormone, can significantly impair witness performance during testimony. He describes how elevated cortisol levels, produced during perceived threats, impair cognitive functions such as memory, decision-making, and emotional regulation. Bill introduces the stress-performance curve, noting that optimal performance occurs at moderate stress levels (between 4 and 6 on a 10-point scale). When cortisol levels are too high, the brain shifts from logical, prefrontal cortex functioning into survival mode, triggering fight, flight, or freeze responses. 

Bill urges attorneys to monitor their witnesses closely for early signs of rising cor...

CSI Litigation Consultant Linda Khzam joins Steve Wood, Ph.D. to discuss managing emotional and anxious witnesses during deposition prep. Drawing on her background in cognitive neuroscience and working with crime victims, Linda explains that many witnesses enter the litigation process with no understanding of what to expect, likening it to being dropped unprepared into a foreign country. She stresses the need to provide a clear roadmap, explaining logistics, roles, and expectations, to help witnesses feel grounded and prepared.

A crucial aspect in witness preparation is identifying anxiety before it escalates. Linda describes signs such as rapid...

Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. delivers a detailed lecture on the concept of neurocognitive remapping and why the human brain is not neurologically equipped for the pressures of litigation. He explains that 95% of witness errors are psychological, not legal or strategic, and that traditional attorney-led preparation often fails because it overlooks critical elements like cognition, emotion, and behavior. Neurocognitive remapping a science-based process that helps witnesses respond to high-stress litigation stimuli in a calm, logical, and strategic manner.

Bill explains how the brain is evolutionarily wired for workplace and social environments, where quick responses, cooperation, and elaboration...

Georgianne Walker, Trial Attorney & Partner at May Oberfell Lorber, LLP, joins Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. to discuss changes she has seen in litigation over the past couple of years. Georgianne talks about how her firm manages the volume of trial work with the logjam of trials taking place. Bill and Georgianne discuss the challenge of hiring, training, and retaining younger associates and how Georgianne's firm manages their associates and lateral hires. Georgianne shares how she works with difficult plaintiff attorneys and how she prepares witnesses for situations where opposing counsel might be acting up during their deposition. Bill...

Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. joins Steve Wood, Ph.D. to answer some recent podcast viewer/listener mail:

- How can my client get their side of their story across at deposition if you tell witnesses to not offer explanations when answering deposition questions?

- How often should my witness be taking a break during a deposition?

- How can I prevent my witness from getting anxious during their deposition?

- If my witness is getting argumentative during questioning, how should I handle that?

- My witness has gone...

Steve Wood, Ph.D. joins host Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. to talk about how to help witnesses navigate deposition situations where they may be thrown off by plaintiff’s counsel disorganized approach or confusing questions, whether intentionally confusing or not. Bill and Steve describe what witnesses should do and be encouraged by defense counsel to do when plaintiff's counsel asks bad or poorly worded questions. What must be avoided is your witness trying to fix opposing counsel's poorly phrased question and providing a response to that since, regardless of how the question is worded, if the witness provides an...

Larry Hall, Partner at Chartwell Law, joins Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. and Steve Wood, Ph.D. to break down the process and positive outcome of a recent trial. Larry shares an overview of the case, how mediation went, and what the demands were from the plaintiff attorney. The group discusses the jury research that was conducted for this case, how the research was set up, what the legal team wanted to learn from the research, and what some of the findings were in the research, including surprises. Bill, Steve, and Larry also talk about identifying pro-plaintiff and pro-defense...

Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. concludes our 4-part series on a sophisticated approach to voir dire. Bill discusses juror sympathy and commitment to following the law. Bill talks about a concept called sympathy override and gives examples of how to get jurors to open up about the concept of sympathy and whether they can maintain discipline when it comes to sympathy. You have to address the challenge that jurors will experience when their heart and head are in conflict. Next, Bill explains Pre-Commitment Theory and how to leverage public commitment from jurors to increase the likelihood of them sticking...

Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. continues with part 3 of our 4-part series on a sophisticated approach to voir dire. In this part, Bill talks about cognitive dissonance and personal responsibility. Cognitive dissonance is defined as mental discomfort. You have to give jurors examples of when you have experienced mental discomfort so they can relate and will share their own experiences with cognitive dissonance and also so they will hold themselves and each other accountable during deliberations. Next Bill describes how to address the topic of personal responsibility and how to plant seeds on it so you prime their brain...

Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D.'s second part of our 4-part series on a sophisticated approach to voir dire. Bill talks about emotional persuasion resistance and the goal during voir dire of inoculating jurors against emotional appeals. Bill shares example questions and stories for how to inoculate jurors against emotional appeals by the opposition during trial and how to identify jurors you want to keep and which you want to strike. Bill also talks about anchoring and how to approach the concepts of anchoring, high dollar awards, counter-anchoring and social inflation, all during voir dire. Watch the video of...

Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. kicks off the first of a 4-part series on a sophisticated approach to voir dire. Bill lays out a highly advanced voir dire model based on behavioral science, cognitive psychology, and decision making research with a focus on cognitive fit, flexibility, and first impressions. It is critical in voir dire to build rapport with jurors to normalize differences in opinion and disclosure of information. The goal is to give jurors an easy out to strike themselves. Bill shares example questions to accomplish this and how to identify juror fit. Next, Bill talks about assessing...

Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. continues discussing the importance of validity and reliability in jury research and specifically talks about the use of the clopening in jury research. The clopening is a combined opening and closing statement - basically a summary presentation of the case. The issue with the clopening is that it impacts your validity and reliability because jurors don't hear clopenings in a real trial so any feedback collected is skewed. Also, in order to get the most accurate data in jury research, you have to measure immediately after the presented stimulus/information. For example, if you...

Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. describes the scientific concepts of validity and reliability in research and why they are individually and collectively so important when conducting jury research. The question that validity helps answer is: are you measuring what you think you are measuring? Bill gives examples of how you can limit or improve your validity through witnesses and presentations in jury research. It's critically important to secure a clean read in your research and Bill explains how to achieve that. 

Reliability in research refers to the consistency and repeatability of a measurement, so that if the s...

Jim Pattillo, Partner, Christian & Small joins Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. to talk about different types of plaintiff attorneys. Jim and Bill discuss what the reasons are for why there has been a degradation in civility between attorneys in recent years and what can be done about it. They share how important curating a reputation is for younger attorneys and the importance of communication. Bill and Jim identify several different plaintiff attorney types and how to manage them: 

- The unqualified and incompetent plaintiff attorney
- The jerk, bombastic plaintiff attorney
- The too busy o...

Bryan Falchuk, President & CEO of Property & Liability Resource Bureau (PLRB), joins Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. to discuss several topics related to the insurance industry. Bryan shares some details on his background and describes what PLRB is, what they do, and the help they provide insurers/MGAs, service providers, and outside counsel. Bill and Bryan talk about current trends in the insurance industry, key issues around litigation, and Bryan describes how he used to manage litigation during his time as a Chief Claims Officer for an insurance carrier. Bryan shares his perspective on how the plaintiff's bar has increased...

Brent Turman, Partner and Trial Attorney with Bell Nunnally & Martin LLP in Dallas, joins Steve Wood, Ph.D. on the podcast to talk about the hit series Suits and ethical issues that surface on the show. Brent gives an overview of an ethics CLE he presents referencing episodes of the show. Steve and Brent discuss how issues that occur in different episodes can inform the appropriate approach to litigation including mock trials, witnesses, ethical questions, competing loyalties, depositions, and more. Watch the video of this episode: https://www.courtroomsciences.com/r/X66

JFK assassination expert Jefferson Morley joins Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. to discuss the latest updates on the JFK assassination including the recent executive order for a full and complete release of all JFK assassination records. Jefferson discusses what the FBI and CIA responses have been to the executive order, provides background on developments around digitization of some records, and his concerns about the delay of the records release since the executive order was signed. Jefferson and Bill also talk about the status of the lawsuit filed to get the JFK files released, share their thoughts on Jefferson's recent...

Bill Mitchell, Founding Partner of Cruser & Mitchell, joins Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. to discuss deal-making and negotiation in litigation and how to be disruptive lawyer. Bill Mitchell describes his philosophy on managing litigation and how he got started taking this unconventional approach to litigation management. Bill talks about three characteristics required to operate as a disruptive lawyer: #1 - legal acumen, #2 - proactivity, #3 -  emotional intelligence. The two Bills discuss several different challenging scenarios, how Bill Mitchell addresses them, and what he recommends other attorneys doing in those situations. Watch the video of this episode: https://www.courtroomsciences.com/r...

Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. shares insights with attorneys for witness prep prior to their witness's deposition testimony. Bill emphasizes that the most important thing for witnesses is to fail during preparation in order to learn and grow so they are prepared for their deposition. This approach can be a challenge for attorneys as you don't want your witness to get mad at you or you may have concerns about hurting their confidence during the prep. It is critical for the witness to understand that their failure during preparation has value and is actually necessary in order for them...

Dr. Bill Kanasky, Jr. talks about the psychological concept of amygdala hijack, which is the fight or flight reaction, and whether to induce amygdala hijack in the plaintiff or plaintiff's expert at deposition. Bill discusses the considerations and situations in which defense counsel should and should not employ this approach and some ideas on how and when to do so:
1) Start the deposition with a surprise such as asking about a sensitive aspect of the case and apply pressure, something that you might have originally planned to do later in the deposition. This can induce a fight or...

Medical malpractice trial attorney Tad Eckenrode joins Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. to talk about the latest issues they are seeing in med mal cases. Tad and Bill discuss developments they are seeing recently including the increase in the number of 7-figure med mal cases as well as more openness from defense clients on investing in jury research to understand what these cases are really worth to help inform whether they should settle or go to trial. Tad shares the value he sees in collecting insights from mock jurors early in the life of the case, particularly during discovery...

Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. joins host Steve Wood, Ph.D. to discuss five (5) problematic witness types. Steve and Bill talk about who these witnesses are, how to identify them, and how to work with each type of witness:

1) The overly agreeable witness - a witness who is willing to agree with everything opposing counsel says or implies; 
2) The defensive witness - someone who wants to argue or won't agree with even basic facts; 
3) The angry witness - a witness whose rage about many/all aspects of the litigation prevent them from working constructively with th...

Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. shares ideas on how to upgrade your voir dire by applying measurement. One of the primary purposes of voir dire is to elicit information and Bill talks about ways to extract information from jurors to get accurate responses. Bill discusses how to handle oral questioning during voir dire, including the use of a 0-10 scale and asking jurors to give one reason for their number. After going over the scientific methodology for this approach to data collection, Bill talks about the art aspect of voir dire: the setup of the question, the answer set...

Steve Wood, Ph.D. and Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. answer the latest podcast listener mail: 

- When doing jury research and there is a confidentiality issue, should I use real names or fake names?
- Should I advocate when doing jury research? 
- What are the benefits of a focus group over a mock trial?
- How should I handle testing evidence that may or may not come in at trial?
- What are the advantages and disadvantages of doing focus groups or mock trials virtually vs. in-person?
- How much sh...

Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. talks about witness preparation and the benefits of using an alternate questioner during mock questioning. Bill shares details on how the CSI witness training program works by building a foundation based on psychology. The first phase of the training is educational and focuses on cognition, behavior, and emotion and how the brain operates in its natural state and how we need it to work during testimony. Once the psychological foundation is built, then strategy can take place, which is the second phase of the training. Bill talks about the benefits of recruiting another attorney...

Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. and Steve Wood, Ph.D. are joined by NYC trial attorney Tony Battista of Condon & Forsyth LLP in the second part of their discussion about a high profile trial they recently worked on together. The group talks about their approach for opening statements, how many drafts of the opening they had, how many versions they tested with mock jurors, and how they dealt with all of the bad stuff in their case in the opening. Tony shares his strategy for cross-examination and his philosophy on dealing with judges. Tony also discusses how he developed...

Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. and Steve Wood, Ph.D. are joined by NYC trial attorney Tony Battista of Condon & Forsyth LLP in the first of a two-part discussion on trial techniques and details on a large aviation fatality case that they recently worked on together. Tony shares his background, talks about how he approaches highly complicated cases, and how he keeps a positive perspective when experiencing difficult days during trial. Tony describes how his team responds to an aviation accident at the time of the incident and what the legal team does to address the emotions of witnesses...

Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. shares a list of dirty little tricks used by opposing counsel at deposition that can cause issues for witnesses who have not been trained and prepared for these devious tricks. 
1. Repetition of questions (i.e., negative reinforcement) 
2. Getting the witness on the Yes Train (lull the witness into an agreement pattern)  
3. Using silence after a witness's answer to get the witness to share more 
4. Asking for clarification on simple points  
5. Being friendly (get the witness to drop their guard) 
6. Appealing to the witness's ego  
7. Asking the witness to help...

Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. is joined by JFK assassination expert, journalist, and author Jefferson Morley to discuss the latest updates on the still unreleased government documents associated with the JFK assassination. Jefferson provides an overview of where things stand currently with release of JFK assassination documents, particularly with regards to the active litigation around these records' release. Bill and Jefferson compare and contrast the JFK assassination to the assassination attempts on President Reagan and President Trump. They also talk about what people may not know or realize about the JFK assassination. Lastly, Bill and Jefferson talk about the...

Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. is joined by Associate Attorney Jeffrey Oates, Attorney Kristin Petty, and Attorney Jason Preciphs from the law firm of Roberts, Carroll, Feldstein, and Peirce. Bill's guests describe the diverse types of cases their firm works on, how their firm attracts and retains associates, and how they provide growth opportunities for their attorneys while also growing the firm. The group share how they talk to clients about getting early career attorneys in their firm the experience they need to be beneficial to the firm's clients. Bill asks the attorneys what surprised them about civil litigation...

Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. talks about unique voir dire questions, particularly around damages, to help attorneys improve their jury selection process and to set the stage for openings. Bill gives examples of topics to ask about during voir dire that help to indoctrinate jurors. Some of the topics for questions Bill discusses: social inflation, lawsuit abuse, justice for the defense, commenting on articles/social media, anchoring, and open-ended questions. Watch the video of this episode: https://www.courtroomsciences.com/r/gYg

Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. talks about something all attorneys, but particularly early career attorneys, need to keep in mind when preparing witnesses for deposition. Sometimes witnesses come into deposition preparation with some trauma which could be related to the litigation, or from other sources, that may be triggered or further exacerbated by the litigation. It's important for the attorney to build trust with witnesses and not add to this stress in how they interact with and communicate with the witness. Bill explains the concepts of exposure theory and systematic desensitization and how attorneys need to approach witnesses they...

Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. talks about the critical importance of preparation for litigation, and particularly early preparation. Bill discusses the risks for the defense by not being prepared and the costs for not being prepared. Bill talks about steps to take before litigation even strikes:
1. Education: Identify people who will be involved in litigation and/or likely to get deposed in a future lawsuit and educate them on the litigation process and start to train them as witnesses in advance;  
2. Review and edit all documentation: Policies & procedures; training manuals; employee handbooks; websites - the language in t...

Jonathan Wohlwend, Associate Attorney at Bradley, joins Steve Wood, Ph.D. to talk about Name, Image, Likeness (NIL) and the legal implications around NIL. Jonathan provides background on what NIL is and is not, particularly within the context of college athletics, and describes how the process for NIL works for recruiting players. Jonathan defines what a collective is, the changes that have happened over the years around collectives, and their role in NIL deals. Steve and Jonathan also discuss several cases related to NIL. Lastly, Jonathan shares his past background as a JAG Officer and words of wisdom for...

Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. talks about the biggest mistake witnesses make during testimony: guessing. Bill describes why this happens, even in light of clear direction to not guess, and how to address it. Bill talks about the attention/behavior gap which is driven by the brain's native neurocognitive wiring and explains the two categories of reasons why witnesses guess: internal and external reasons. 

Internal factors: 
1. Witnesses experience shame and guilt for not knowing or not remembering something; 
2. Witnesses don't want to hurt the case and/or want to win; 
3. Witnesses have a fear of p...

Steve Wood, Ph.D. talks about seeing more and more examples of witnesses who are fighting with opposing counsel in their deposition or at trial, motivated by a desire to get their story across. Steve covers several reasons why pivoting like this is a bad idea including: arguing with a professional arguer is foolish; jurors view witnesses who pivot or argue with opposing counsel as less credible; the questioning attorney will call the witness out on this move; most witnesses aren't experienced enough to be selective about when to fight and when not to fight, leading to potential pitfalls...

Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. talks about how to select experts for trial testimony. One option is to pick national experts and another approach is to choose an expert who is more local to the venue. Bill walks through some important considerations when selecting an expert witness: 
- How much time does the expert spend testifying professionally?
- How much of their income comes from testifying as an expert witness?
- How effective as a witness are they in addition to being a subject matter expert?

The decision about who would make the best c...

Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. and Ava Hernandez join host Steve Wood, Ph.D. for another edition of From the Trenches where they discuss recent observations and updates from jury research projects, witness trainings, and cases that the CSI team have been working on. First, they talk about how too many attorneys wait until close to trial to contact the CSI team for help with training witnesses for trial and/or jury research, or even jury selection, and the problems with waiting until the eve of trial to bring in help. They discuss the more appropriate timing to prepare...

Paul Motz, Shareholder and Trial Attorney, at Segal McCambridge Singer & Mahoney joins Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. to dispel several myths around litigation and talk about what's fact and what's fiction. Paul and Bill discuss whether jurors hate corporations, whether the person most knowledgeable should always serve as the corporate representative, whether someone who has been deposed many times before is a good witness for subsequent depositions, whether witnesses can win the case at deposition, whether witnesses are more vulnerable during a Zoom deposition, when to prep witnesses for trial, whether the former employee is always a horrible witness...

Steve Wood, Ph.D. joins host Ava Hernandez to discuss his background and how he got into the litigation consulting business. Steve shares details on his education and his interest in how people make decisions which he applies to his role as a litigation consultant. Ava and Steve also talk about their fascination with how people behave and in particular how people's perspectives are influenced by their interactions with others especially within the context of the litigation process. Steve discusses the changes he has seen in litigation since he started as a litigation consultant and the aspects of litigation...

Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. talks about how to manage stress during trial. Bill shares the three areas to focus on: physical health, emotional health, and mental health. 

Physical health keys: 
1. Protect your sleep - really important to get plenty of restful sleep. 
2. Exercise - get your body moving, even if its just for a few minutes by taking a walk or a short run. 
3. Eat right - you have to eat well and eat right; ignoring your diet is a recipe for poor performance. 

Emotional health: To preserve your emotional health, focus...

Nationally recognized and renowned memory expert Dr. Elizabeth Loftus joins Steve Wood, Ph.D. for the second part of their discussion about memory, where they talk about repressed memories. Dr. Loftus shares her experience working on cases where repressed memories were at the core of the case and the research she has done on repressed memories and false memories. Steve and Elizabeth discuss the ways in which she has been challenged and attacked for her research and the work she has done around repressed memories. Lastly, they talk about how Dr. Loftus acts as an investigator on the cases...

Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. answers another round of podcast listener mail:

- What is the best timing for witness training?
- What is the best routine for the witness the morning of the deposition? 
- How do you deal with catastrophic injury and death cases every week?
- How long should focus groups be?
- Any updates on nuclear verdicts and how to prevent them?

Watch the video of this episode: https://www.courtroomsciences.com/r/yn6

Nationally recognized and renowned memory expert Dr. Elizabeth Loftus joins Steve Wood, Ph.D. for the first part of a two-part episode about memory. Dr. Loftus is a Distinguished Professor at University of California-Irvine and has consulted on the issue of memory for hundreds of civil and criminal cases throughout her career. Dr. Loftus shares her background on how she got into the study of memory and eyewitness memory, in particular. Dr. Loftus describes the three major stages of eyewitness memory, the malleable nature of memory, and gives examples of research studies that she has been involved with, including...

John E. Hall, Jr., Partner with Hall, Booth, Smith, P.C. joins Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. to talk about the trial process. Bill and John discuss preparation for trial, managing stress leading up to trial, as well as, managing stresses during trial. John shares the strategic approach his team employs to prepare for trial and how he works with his trial team. John and Bill talk about how to stay focused on trial matters while there may be conversations taking place about settlement, as well as, how to deal with opinions and ideas from other stakeholders such as...

Legal Sector Analyst and Forecaster Jordan Furlong joins host Ava Hernandez to discuss a range of topics around the future of legal including shifts in market expectations, the development of early career lawyers, and changes in the business of law. Jordan and Ava talk about how law firms must reconsider and reimagine their approach to their purpose. Jordan highlights  how the development program for new associates needs to change, in particular due to the impact AI and other technologies are having on lower-level legal work. They discuss generational divides in law firms and how successful firms are managing the m...

As a follow-up to Part 1 (Episode #220) of what not to do in opening statements, Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. talks about what to do in your opening statements. Bill discusses a few key principles for delivering opening statements: the speed of delivery, eye contact, repetition, pausing/using silence, movement, volume, and telling the jurors what you want. Bill talks about primacy and recency effects and leveraging them in the delivery of an opening statement and also defines and describes the cognitive lens and how it should be used to frame your case. Bill breaks down why a shorter opening...

Michael “Mick” Williams, Ph.D., Founding Member of The Science of P/CVE & Shawn C. Marsh, Ph.D., Director of Judicial Studies and Associate Professor of Communication Studies / Social Psychology at the University of Nevada, Reno join Steve Wood, Ph.D. to discuss the concept of Terror Management Theory and its implications on civil litigation. Mick and Shawn define what Terror Management Theory is, how Terror Management Theory relates to the Reptile Theory and Edge Theory, and what the evidence and implications are for juror decision making related to concepts of mortality. The group also discuss some of the rese...

In the first of a two-part episode, Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. talks about opening statements and what not to do in your opening statement. First, Bill explains the primary reasons why opening statements fail: 

1) Attorneys don't get formal training on how to construct an opening statement;
2) Attorneys don't have an understanding of how the juror brain processes information;
3) The games our minds play on us;
4) Many attorneys have less experience and opportunity to do opening statements because fewer cases go to trial. 

Bill shares what not to do in your opening st...

Attorney Chris Turney of Turney LG joins Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. to discuss inflated settlements and verdicts. Chris describes what he believes are the factors that are influencing and effecting outsized settlements and verdicts and walks through a 4 quadrant concept to help explain what is happening. Chris defines what he refers to as direct actions, indirect actions, intentional actions, and unintentional actions and provides examples and details for each quadrant. Chris and Bill discuss verdict shaming, spike evaluations, storytelling, generating interest for the jury, and how to talk to clients about investing in weaponry. Lastly, Bill and Chris...

Ava Hernandez, M.A. joins Steve Wood, Ph.D to talk about her background and how she got started in the litigation consulting field. Ava shares how she spent the early part of her career working in law firms, including both plaintiff and defense firms, then got interested in psychology, went back to earn her Masters in Clinical Psychology, and then ended up at Courtroom Sciences as a Litigation Consultant. Ava talks about what type of cases she enjoys working on and why the application of psychology in litigation is so interesting to her. She shares how important it...

Holly Howanitz, Managing Partner, Tyson & Mendes joins Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. to talk about cross-examination of expert witnesses. Holly highlights that you need think about your goals when cross-examining expert witnesses especially since experts often have more experience testifying than a fact witness. Bill and Holly talk about strategic decisions such as when to bring up "bombs" for the expert either at deposition or at trial and how to approach preparing for cross-examining an expert. Holly shares how she prepares for an arrogant expert or an expert that does primarily work for the plaintiff's side. Bill and Holly...

Kent Doll, Trial Attorney & Owner, KND Law joins Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. to share his litigation philosophy, Bill and Kent discuss the difference between a trial attorney and a litigator. They discuss trial technology and Kent's approach to jury selection and how important it is to get jurors to open up and share so you can understand their biases and perspectives. Bill and Kent talk about opening statements and closings and Kent shares the advice he would give to attorneys in the early part of their career and thoughts on managing mental health in a highly stressful job.  W...

Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. and Steve Wood, Ph.D. conclude our med mal litigation series by talking about trial preparation for medical malpractice cases. Steve and Bill discuss important tips about managing and preparing witnesses for trial testimony, working with witnesses as early as possible before trial, and helping them understand the difference between direct and cross examination and what to know if they are called adversely. They emphasize how important it is for witnesses to be completely familiar with their deposition testimony and to keep their responses to questions short so that jurors can follow along. Bill...

Steve Wood, Ph.D. talks about preparing witnesses for trial testimony. Steve mentions several key tips including teaching witnesses to take their time when responding both during direct examination and cross-examination. It is important for witnesses to be consistent with how much time they are taking to answer both direct and cross questions so jurors don't perceive any discrepancy. Taking time in answering also helps jurors who are hearing the information for the first time and need time to process the questions and responses. Steve also highlights the need for witnesses to have short, concise answers. Long, wordy responses...

Dr. Jordan Romano joins Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. to discuss expert witness testimony in medical malpractice cases. Dr. Romano has served as an expert witness on numerous medical malpractice cases and talks about how he got started as an expert witness, how he got up to speed on the litigation process, and what he does as a hospitalist. Bill asks Dr. Romano about the differences between working as an expert for the plaintiff's side and the defense side and what advice he would give attorneys on what they can do better when working with experts. Dr. Romano also...

Steve Wood, Ph.D. & Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. join host Ava Hernandez to talk about what they have been seeing in the cases they have been working on recently. Steve shares that he's been seeing more jurors who are expecting fact witnesses to remember all details from the incident and talks about how to address this issue. The group discuss the pros and cons of the legal strategy of withholding documents from witnesses or not showing witnesses videos or other documents prior to their deposition, in particular corporate reps. Bill shares an insight he recently heard from a...

Medical malpractice defense attorney Michael Denning of Heyl Royster joins Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. to talk about the timeline of litigation in medical malpractice. First, Michael and Bill touch on the mental stress of being named in a lawsuit and the importance of making sure the physician or named defendant is doing okay and checking in on their mental health. They discuss the process of building trust with the defendant and issues that arise around finger pointing and defendants who are worried about their reputation if word gets out that they are being sued. Michael and Bill talk...

Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. joins host Ava Hernandez to discuss his background and how he got into the litigation consulting industry. Ava and Bill talk about how their backgrounds in clinical psychology allow them to assess and prepare witnesses in a way that attorneys are not trained to. They also discuss the ethical challenges with the tension that can occur in working with witnesses, the emotional and mental issues that a witness may be dealing with and addressing their psychological wellness prior to witness prep. Lastly, Ava and Bill offer their insights on what they see in the...

Chuck Ingram, Partner with Estes, Ingram, Foels & Gibbs, P.A., joins Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. to talk about the discovery stage of medical malpractice litigation. Chuck discusses the importance being proactive during the discovery phase in med mal cases and how he approaches discovery differently based on which plaintiff firm has filed the suit. Bill and Chuck also talk about developing younger attorneys, managing co-defendants, strategies for admitting liability, the value of jury research, over-reliance on expert witnesses, and dealing with emotional nurse witnesses. Watch the video of this episode: https://www.courtroomsciences.com/r/Pgv

Shane O'Dell, Member, Naman, Howell, Smith, and Lee & Mike Bassett, Trial Attorney, The Bassett Firm, join Steve Wood, Ph.D. to talk about some of the misperceptions of the defense bar. The group discuss what the Reptile Theory is really all about and that the purpose of the Reptile Theory is less about scaring the jury and more about empowering them. 

Mike, Shane, and Steve discuss the evolution of Reptile to The Edge and what is different about The Edge from Reptile Theory, as well as what they are seeing as best practices from strong plaintiff attorneys. T...

Kristi Harrington, Certified Mediator and Arbitrator with Kristi Harrington Dispute Resolution, joins Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. to discuss mediation and alternative dispute resolution in medical malpractice cases. Kristi shares her background and the help she offers clients with alternative dispute resolution and mediation. They talk about issues they encounter in medical malpractice cases and ways to get the most favorable and reasonable outcomes in mediation.

Kristi and Bill also cover what to look for when hiring a mediator including someone who understands the medical field, someone who can be empathetic to both parties, and someone who...

Leah Miller, Fractional CFO, LNM Financial Services LLC joins Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. to talk about law firm finances. Leah and Bill define key financial terms such as revenue, expenses, profitability, and talk about the complexities that crop up as a firm grows. Leah shares the guidance she gives her clients on how often they should be looking at their numbers and describes what a Fractional CFO does and how it differs from a CPA or bookkeeper. Leah and Bill also discuss setting goals, managing cash flow, and what lawyers and law firms need to watch out for...

In part 4 of our medical malpractice litigation series, Ava Hernandez joins Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. to discuss preparing mid to higher-trained nurses for deposition testimony. BSNs, MSNs, Nurse Practioners, Nurse Managers, Charge Nurses, and similar nurses have significant responsibilities and often come into their deposition with a different perspective than an LPN or less-experienced nurse might and therefore must be prepared and handled differently during deposition prep. Ava and Bill discuss how sometimes these nurses have to contend with blame that may come from the plaintiff and/or the plaintiff's family, from physicians, or even from other nurses...

Will Stute, Partner at Orrick, joins Steve Wood, Ph.D. to discuss the work he did on Gee v NCAA in which he won a defense verdict. Will provides some personal background and ways he has honed his craft and then relates his experience with defending mass tort cases. He gives an overview of the strategy behind this bellwether case (Gee v NCAA) he worked on, plus his insights on leveraging jury research for his cases and his approach to jury selection. Will and Steve talk about how best to leverage objections, the feedback that jurors in this case...

Jeff Willis, MD, Owner/Physician Consultant of On-Call MedLegal Consulting joins Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. to talk about consulting for medical malpractice attorneys. Dr. Willis specializes in pre-litigation and pre-trial services, working as a member of the legal team from intake through resolution. Dr. Willis provides case merit analysis, precision medical expert matching, case strategy development, and deposition preparation. Jeff and Bill discuss expert witnesses, the differences between a D.O and M.D., legal nurse consultants, and the differences between plaintiff attorneys and defense attorneys in how they manage medical malpractice cases, Lastly, Jeff and Bill share...

Trial Attorney Cody Gomora from The Wolf Law Firm, P.C. joins Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. to discuss how younger attorneys can navigate their role as civil litigation defense attorneys. Cody shares how his experience in the district attorney's office and trying criminal cases gave him invaluable courtroom experience that he now applies in his civil litigation defense work. Bill and Cody also discuss generational differences between attorneys, between attorneys and jurors, and talk about the impact and influence of social media in litigation. Lastly, Bill and Cody discuss the importance of mentorship for younger attorneys. Watch the...

Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. talks about the role and impact of expert witnesses in medical malpractice litigation. Bill shares that typically expert witness testimony doesn't get you very far in med mal cases in terms of juror decision-making. This is due to the fact that the expert witness is unable to directly evaluate the patient unlike expert witnesses who can, for example, evaluate defective parts in a product liability case. Expert witnesses in medical malpractice cases can help with case evaluation and help with preparing the case, but their testimony does not influence juror decision-making. One area where...

Steve Wood, Ph.D. & Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. commemorate the 200th episode of The Litigation Psychology Podcast and discuss the misunderstanding many have about the correlation between juror anger and outsized verdicts. Steve and Bill share the scientific data that Courtroom Sciences has collected and analyzed to understand the role that juror anger does or does not play in nuclear verdicts. Steve and Bill explain the process of collecting the data and how the results show that although juror anger is a factor in large damage awards, it is a small percentage when compared to other factors. Watch...

In the first part of a series of episodes about medical malpractice litigation, Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. talks about nurses sitting for deposition, in particular, the LPN, and the importance of the initial meeting and communication with these nurses. These lower-level nurses often struggle at deposition due to their nervousness about the process, fear of the ramifications, potential blame issues, etc. It's critical to meet with these nurses as soon as possible, checking in with them, seeing how they are doing, and demonstrating that you care about them as a person. Bill discusses how crucial the initial assessment...

Steve Wood, Ph.D. is joined by Sean Murphy, Practice Leader of CSI Critical Communications & Brent Turman, Partner with Bell Nunnally to talk about social media in the courtroom. Sean begins by talking about cameras in the courtroom and gives the example of the narrative around Donald Trump's upcoming trials and his team's request for allowing cameras in the courtroom. Brent shares how important public opinion can be in some trials and how that may influence the wording in different motions that the trial teams may file, even if that language may not be legally necessary but instead may...

Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. is joined by Brendan Dawson, Founder of Accident Plan, to talk about how the Accident Plan software helps guide truck drivers to manage and secure an accident scene when an incident occurs and capture the critical data to be shared with others offsite. Brendan shares how the training for truck drivers using Accident Plan allows them to be more prepared and follow a process and checklist when dealing with an accident. Bill and Brendan talk about the return on investment on being proactive and getting stakeholders informed quickly and early so that claims can...

Steve Wood, Ph.D. & Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. kick off 2024 with another episode answering podcast listener mail. Questions addressed:

-  How can I deal with anchoring by plaintiff's counsel?
-  Is it okay if my witness wears a nose ring to her video deposition?
-  How can I deal with an ex-employee who is not willing to cooperate in their deposition prep?
-  Does it sound bad for a witness to respond to a question with "I don't know"?
-  Is it better for a female attorney to cross-examine an adverse female witne...

Steve Wood, Ph.D. & Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. talk about the impacts of PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder) on witnesses in litigation. PTSD can occur in several different types of litigation and isn't exclusively just in cases involving vehicle accidents or bad medical outcomes. Steve and Bill provide a checklist for defense attorneys on what to look for when working with witnesses to identify potential PTSD issues that may require additional time, assessment, or even treatment. 

Some signs to look for and/or questions to ask: 
- intrusive memories and thoughts; 
- negative changes in thi...

Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. talks about how to manage the teaching moment during trial testimony. When your expert witness or defendant is put on the stand with the goal of teaching the jurors something, your witness must meet the jury where they are. It's important to remember the concept of juror cognitive lag, which is that jurors will lag behind in their cognition and your witness has to understand that the jurors are not going to be able to follow along easily. So, the witness has to make adjustments to their teaching methodology and you and your witness...

Bryan Aghakhani, Partner, Bordin Semmer joins Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. to talk about the attorney perspective on the deposition. Bryan states that cases are won or lost at deposition and that the preparation before deposition, and being actively engaged at deposition with objections, is key for defense attorneys when defending depositions. Bryan and Bill discuss the difference in preparing a fact witness and a corporate representative 30(b)(6) for deposition and also talk about the strategy and approach for taking a plaintiff's deposition. Bryan shares his thoughts on taking the deposition of the plaintiff's expert and the philosophy around...

Steve Wood, Ph.D. & Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. talk about the misperception that humanizing the corporation is valuable and relevant to jurors. Often, defense counsel and the companies they represent want to talk at trial about how their company is made up of individuals just like the jurors, how much the company gives in charity, how many volunteering activities they do, and more. Steve and Bill debunk the assumption that time spent humanizing the company will make jurors more sympathetic toward the company. Talking  about all of the things the company does that "humanizes" them is a waste o...