Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. discusses negative thought patterns of witnesses and how critical it is to identify and address these negative thoughts during prep. Bill shares a story about a recent witness he worked with and the process he took with this witness who was struggling with ruminating and negative thoughts. He advises attorneys to make the time to confront these emotional, negative thought patterns, to be prepared for them to resurface during prep, and to address them throughout the process until they are fully resolved because they can completely derail the witness's performance.

Chantal Roberts, Principal & CEO of CMR Consulting, joins Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. to talk all about insurance. Bill and Chantal discuss the all-out blitz against the insurance industry by the plaintiff's bar and the issues with policyholder's confusion and misunderstanding about insurance. They discuss the relationship between defense attorneys and adjusters and suggest how they can work better together. Bill and Chantal talk about the evolution of Reptile and the expansion of Reptile questions beyond safety and risk to other areas such as claims handling in bad faith cases and fairness in employment cases. Lastly, they discuss where things are headed in the insurance industry and the impact and future of AI in insurance.

The likeability of witnesses is a huge factor in juror evaluation and decision-making. Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. talks about the necessity of testing plaintiff likeability by getting the plaintiff deposition on video so it can be played in a focus group to get feedback on the plaintiff. Juror perception of the plaintiff is a major influencing factor in how they consider the case. Likeability of defense witnesses is important to test as well since the likeability factor applies to both sides, so understanding what jurors think about the likeability, credibility, knowledge, etc. of all witnesses is crucial. Lastly, Bill shares how to address likeability of plaintiff witnesses in voir dire in order to diffuse it as an issue during deliberations.

CSI Litigation Consultant Linda Khzam joins Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. to talk about early jury research. Linda describes the format of the virtual focus group model and benefits that clients and attorneys realize from conducting these education and evaluation jury research projects. Bill and Linda discuss how focus groups differ from mock trials, and how, especially when conducted early, help identify hidden vulnerabilities in your case. They also talk about the advantages of the test/retest model in jury research and how focus groups can, in certain circumstances, be more useful for trial prep than a mock trial. Lastly, they discuss other uses of the focus group model including testing counter-anchors, damages, liability, voir dire, opening statements, and exhibits.

Mike Bassett, Trial Lawyer and Managing Partner at The Bassett Firm, joins Steve Wood, Ph.D. and Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. to commemorate the 300th episode of The Litigation Psychology Podcast and discuss a wide range of topics about managing litigation and how things have evolved over the years. Mike shares the benefits he and his firm realize from conducting early jury research and how these early focus groups guide discovery and influence mediation. Steve, Bill, and Mike talk about the importance of validity in how jury research is conducted, the impact of confirmation bias on the legal team, and how clients need to view jury research as an investment, not simply an expense. The group also talk about attorney recruitment, attorney retention and the benefits of using Culture Index for hiring and team management. Lastly, they discuss the use of AI in legal and the criticality of briefer and tighter opening statements in today's world of short attention spans.

Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. shares recent feedback he has received from corporate and insurance clients with regards to a reluctance by some of their defense attorneys to take a different approach in how they manage their client's litigation. Some corporate and insurance clients are wanting more proactivity and aggressiveness from their counsel and are running into resistance from some, which is leaving them frustrated. Bill tells a couple of stories from recent interactions as examples of how corporate and insurance clients are thinking about the working relationship with their firms and makes suggestions about how attorneys can get better alignment with their clients on how they want their files handled.

Doug Marcello, Shareholder with Saxton & Stump and an expert in trucking litigation, joins Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. to give a state of the union on litigation in the transportation and trucking space. Doug shares what he sees as the primary issues in trucking litigation today and Bill and Doug discuss suggestions on what insurance companies and defense attorneys should do differently in managing their litigation. Doug shoots down common objections the defense side often bring up related to being proactive. He describes the benefits of conducting early jury research and talks about situations where it makes sense to proactively sue the plaintiff for an accident before they can file suit against the defendant. Bill and Doug also discuss the driver shortage challenge, managing immigrant drivers, technology, AI, and more.

Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. describes the surprising connection between Meat Loaf's 1993 hit song I Would Do Anything for Love (But I Won't Do That) and the Reptile Theory. Bill breaks down the correlation between the lyrics of this love song and the unreasonable expectations and standards that are present in Reptile questions. He explains how attorneys need to help witnesses understand that circumstances and judgment play a pivotal role when responding to classic Reptile questions in deposition.