Words Matter: How Attorney Language Abstraction and Emotional Valence Shape Juror Decision-Making
Abstract
1. Introduction
“For it is not enough to know what we ought to say; we must also say it as we ought.”—
1.1. Language Abstraction
1.2. Language Abstraction and Emotional Valence
1.3. Attorney Language and Juror Perceptions
1.4. Prosecution Versus Defense Language
1.5. Research Overview
1.6. Hypotheses and Research Questions
- Research Question: Liability Perceptions
2. Method
2.1. Participants
2.2. Design
2.3. Materials and Measures
2.3.1. Civil Case Summary
2.3.2. Closing Statements
2.3.3. Manipulation Check
2.3.4. Liability Form
2.3.5. Perceptions of the Defendant
2.3.6. Perceptions of the Plaintiff
2.3.7. Attorney Credibility Scale
2.3.8. Attention Checks
2.3.9. Demographic Questionnaire
2.4. Procedure
2.5. Analysis Plan
3. Results
3.1. Manipulation Check Results
3.2. Juror Liability Ratings
3.3. Juror Verdicts
3.4. Effects of Language on Attorney Credibility
3.5. Effects of Emotional Valence on Perceptions of Trial Actors
4. Discussion
4.1. Interpretation of Language Abstraction and Valence Effects
4.2. Attorney Credibility
4.3. Emotional Valence and Defendant Ethics
4.4. Discussion of Manipulation Check Results
4.5. Limitations
4.5.1. Participants and Online Modality
4.5.2. Manipulation
4.5.3. External Validity
4.6. Intellectual Merit and Broader Impact
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A. Case Summary and Closing Statements
- Introduction
- A definition of burden of proof
- A definition of liability
- A case overview
- Testimony from expert witnesses
- Closing statements
- Questions about yourself and your perceptions of the case
- Burden of Proof Instructions
- Liability Instructions
- Case Overview
- Mrs. Kathy Summers—Plaintiff
- Chemco Chemicals Inc.—Defendant
- Dr. Raymond Jones—Plaintiff expert witness
- Dr. Mark Davis—Defense expert witness
- Kathy’s Cancer
- Trial Issue
- Evidence Presented at Trial—Plaintiff
- Expert Witness for Kathy: Dr. Raymond Jones
- Evidence Presented at Trial—Defense
- Expert Witness for Chemco: Dr. Mark Davis
| Negative–Concrete Condition: Over the past 20 years, Chemco has released contaminants into the water supply and has been sued six times in the past 5 years by other women diagnosed with ovarian cancer. The chemical company has also been sued in seven lawsuits for releasing chemical waste into the environment. | Negative–Abstract Condition: Chemco has long been known to negatively affect the water supply and has been sued several times in the past 5 years by other women suffering from ovarian cancer. The chemical company has also been accused of harming the environment. |
| Greenpeace, an environmental watchdog organization, reported that the chemical company caused a scientifically significant amount of pollution in the environment and tried to cover up these allegations by destroying documents and concealing or lying about the results of their environmental pollution tests. The cost of removing these cancer-causing chemicals from the water supply by Kathy’s house is millions of dollars, and it will probably take decades to get rid of most of these pollutants. | Greenpeace, an environmental watchdog organization, has concerns about the company’s extensive contribution to pollution and believes that Chemco is not upfront about the results of their environmental pollution tests. The cost of removing these health-hazardous chemicals from the water supply by Kathy’s house is enormous, and it will probably take a very long time to get rid of most of these pollutants. |
| Positive–Concrete Condition: We acknowledge that Chemco makes over 200 products that work and are widely used in people’s skin care, clothing, and home products. Their chemical product goes into hundreds of products, including cosmetics, carpets, clothes, leather, and textiles. Therefore, their product might be in the clothes you wear, the carpet you walk on, and cosmetics you apply to your skin to make it soft every day. | Positive–Abstract Condition: We acknowledge that Chemco makes effective and beneficial products. Their chemical product goes into countless products, including cosmetics, carpets, clothes, leather, and textiles. Therefore, their product might be in the clothes you wear, the carpet you walk on, and cosmetics you enjoy on your skin every day. |
| Millions of people around the world have received benefits from their products such as affordability and accessibility. Consumers pay a fair price for everyday items that this widely used product is in. Greenpeace, an environmental watchdog organization, also reported that Chemco was developing new best practices methods and handbooks with Greenpeace to decrease the amount of waste secreted into the environment by 50% in the next 5 years. | Millions of people around the world have received benefits from their products. Consumers also pay a fair price for everyday items that this widely used product is in. Greenpeace, an environmental watchdog organization, also reported that Chemco was working together with Greenpeace to achieve more environmentally friendly practices in upcoming years. |
References
- Alicke, M. D. (1992). Culpable causation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63(3), 368–378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Amsterdam, A. G., & Bruner, J. S. (2009). Minding the law. Harvard University Press. [Google Scholar]
- Amsterdam, A. G., & Hertz, R. (1992). An analysis of closing arguments to a jury. NYL Scholarly Law Review, 37, 55. [Google Scholar]
- Aristotle. (n.d.). Book III—Chapter 1. In L. Honeycutt (Ed.), Rhetoric. Available online: https://kairos.technorhetoric.net/stasis/2017/honeycutt/aristotle/rhet3-1.html (accessed on 23 June 2025).
- Brodsky, S. L., Griffin, M. P., & Cramer, R. J. (2010). The witness credibility scale: An outcome measure for expert witness research. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 28(6), 892–907. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Burguet, A. (2011). Linguistic abstraction in media criminal case: Damning circumstances for offender. Revue Internationale de Psychologie Sociale, 24(4), 23–44. [Google Scholar]
- Chapman, V. V. (1993). The effects of language style on the credibility of legal testimony [Doctoral dissertation, Indiana University]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses. Available online: https://unr.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/dissertations-theses/effects-language-style-on-credibility-legal/docview/304032692/se-2 (accessed on 12 September 2025).
- Cohen, T. H. (2009). Tort bench and jury trials in state courts (2005). Diane Publishing. [Google Scholar]
- Cova, F., Bertoux, M., Bourgeois-Gironde, S., & Dubois, B. (2012). Judgments about moral responsibility and determinism in patients with behavioural variant of frontotemporal dementia: Still compatibilists. Consciousness and Cognition, 21(2), 851–864. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Damasio, A. R. (1994). Descartes’ error: Emotion, reason, and the human brain. G.P. Putnam’s Sons. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Donelson, R., & Hannikainen, I. R. (2020). Fuller and the folk: The inner morality of law revisited. In T. Lombrozo, J. Knobe, & S. Nichols (Eds.), Oxford studies in experimental philosophy (Vol. 3, pp. 6–28). Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]
- Douglas, K. M., & Sutton, R. M. (2006). When what you say about others says something about you: Language abstraction and inferences about describers’ attitudes and goals. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42(4), 500–508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Douglas, K. M., & Sutton, R. M. (2010). By their words ye shall know them: Language abstraction and the likability of describers. European Journal of Social Psychology, 40(2), 366–374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Durant, A., & Leung, J. H. (2016). Linguistic strategies used by lawyers. In Language and law. Taylor & Francis. [Google Scholar]
- Edwards, C. P. (2022). Effects of direct and indirect emotional manipulations on Mock Jurors’ decision-making [Doctoral dissertation, University of Nevada]. Available online: https://www.proquest.com/docview/2700338933?fromopenview=true&pq-origsite=gscholar&sourcetype=Dissertations%20&%20Theses (accessed on 20 July 2023).
- Edwards, K., & Bryan, T. S. (1997). Judgmental biases produced by instructions to disregard: The (paradoxical) case of emotional information. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23(8), 849–864. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A. G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Feigenson, N. (2000). Legal blame: How jurors think and talk about accidents. American Psychological Association. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gosling, S. D., Vazire, S., Srivastava, S., & John, O. P. (2004). Should we trust web-based studies? A comparative analysis of six preconceptions about internet questionnaires. American Psychologist, 59(2), 93. Available online: https://psycnet.apa.org/buy/2004-11287-002 (accessed on 12 September 2025). [CrossRef]
- Kneer, M., & Machery, E. (2019). No luck for moral luck. Cognition, 182, 331–348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kogut, T., & Ritov, I. (2005). The “identified victim” effect: An identified group, or just a single individual? Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 18(3), 157–167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lambert, E. M. (2022). Emotion in the neutral court: Attorney appeals to emotion in jury trial argumentation [Honors thesis, Bates College]. SCARAB. Available online: https://scarab.bates.edu/honorstheses/407/ (accessed on 12 September 2025).
- Linder, D. (1995). Closing argument of johnnie cochran. Famous Trials. Available online: https://famous-trials.com/simpson/1868-cochranclosing (accessed on 20 June 2022).
- Maass, A., Salvi, D., Arcuri, L., & Semin, G. R. (1989). Language use in intergroup contexts: The linguistic intergroup bias. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 981–993. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Martínez, E., Mollica, F., & Gibson, E. (2023). Even lawyers do not like legalese. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 120(23), e2302672120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Neuman, Y., Turney, P., & Cohen, Y. (2012). How language enables abstraction: A study in computational cultural psychology. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 46, 129–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- O’Barr, W. (1985). Linguistic evidence: Language, power, and strategy in the courtroom. Academic Press. [Google Scholar]
- Ross, L. (1977). The intuitive psychologist and his shortcomings: Distortions in the attribution process. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 173–220). Academic Press. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rubini, M., Menegatti, M., & Moscatelli, S. (2017). The strategic role of language abstraction in achieving symbolic and practical goals. In European review of social psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 263–313). Routledge. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schmid, J., & Fiedler, K. (1998). The backbone of closing speeches: The impact of prosecution versus defense language on judicial attribution. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28(13), 1140–1172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Semin, G. R. (2000). Agenda 2000—Communication: Language as an implementational device for cognition. European Journal of Social Psychology, 30(5), 595–612. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Semin, G. R., & Fiedler, K. (1988). The cognitive functions of linguistic categories in describing persons: Social cognition and language. Journal of personality and Social Psychology, 54(4), 558. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Struchiner, N., De Almeida, G. D. F., & Hannikainen, I. R. (2020). Legal decision-making and the abstract/concrete paradox. Cognition, 205, 104421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tukey, J. W. (1949). Comparing individual means in the analysis of variance. Biometrics, 5, 99–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Visher, C. A. (1987). Juror decision making: The importance of evidence. Law and Human Behavior, 11(1), 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wallace, H. H. (1995). Recipe for closing arguments: A baker’s dozen key ingredients. Trial, 31, 64–65. [Google Scholar]
- Wyer, R. S., Budesheim, T. T., & Lambert, A. J. (1990). Cognitive representations of conversations about persons. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 218–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ziemke, M., & Brodsky, S. (2015). To flatter the jury: Ingratiation during closing arguments. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 22(5), 688–700. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]



Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Healy, J.; Miller, M.K.; Yang, Y. Words Matter: How Attorney Language Abstraction and Emotional Valence Shape Juror Decision-Making. Behav. Sci. 2025, 15, 1355. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs15101355
Healy J, Miller MK, Yang Y. Words Matter: How Attorney Language Abstraction and Emotional Valence Shape Juror Decision-Making. Behavioral Sciences. 2025; 15(10):1355. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs15101355
Chicago/Turabian StyleHealy, Justice, Monica K. Miller, and Yueran Yang. 2025. "Words Matter: How Attorney Language Abstraction and Emotional Valence Shape Juror Decision-Making" Behavioral Sciences 15, no. 10: 1355. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs15101355
APA StyleHealy, J., Miller, M. K., & Yang, Y. (2025). Words Matter: How Attorney Language Abstraction and Emotional Valence Shape Juror Decision-Making. Behavioral Sciences, 15(10), 1355. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs15101355

