New Definition of a “Good Case"
From Science of Justice by Jury Analyst
January 2, 2026 · 34 min · Season 2 · Episode 31
About this episode
This episode challenges the belief that strong facts guarantee strong verdicts by exploring the impact of juror psychology on case value.
Send us Fan Mail We challenge the old belief that strong facts guarantee strong verdicts and show why juror psychology now sets case value. We map a path to decision architecture across intake, discovery, narrative design, testing, and voir dire to prevent invisible ceiling compression. • Three failed assumptions that undermine plaintiff strategy • Five control variables jurors’ cognitive load, belief mechanics, narrative stability, emotional velocity, internal bias amplification • System On...
People in this episode
Host: Jury Analyst
Topics covered
- juror psychology
- case value
- decision architecture
- plaintiff strategy
- cognitive load
Keywords
- juror psychology
- case value
- decision architecture
- plaintiff strategy
- cognitive load
- narrative design
- voir dire
More episodes of Science of Justice
- Why Behavioral Science Beats Courtroom Folklore · June 10, 2026 · 37 min
- Find the Friction Before the Defense Does · June 3, 2026 · 40 min
- The Human Weight of Plaintiff Advocacy · May 27, 2026 · 32 min
- What Jurors Actually Hear During Closing Arguments · May 21, 2026 · 32 min
- Find the Counter Story Before the Jury Does · May 13, 2026 · 35 min
- Why Experience Needs a Pressure Test · May 6, 2026 · 42 min
Explore listener stats, chart rankings, contacts and more on the Science of Justice podcast page.