The might of numbers cannot be overstated. With a large sample size achieved through virtual crowdsourcing, we cast a wider net, capturing a diverse cross-section of society that closely mirrors an actual jury pool. This breadth ensures that our insights are not just whispers from a few, but the collective voice of many, offering a robust and reliable foundation for your trial strategy.

We recruit jurors using what is known as “virtual crowdsourcing”. It is the gold standard method of sampling for academic and applied social scientists because of its high fidelity to the regular population.

Participants are recruited online via a task crowdsourcing platform such as Prolific or CloudResearch. Prospective participants are screened to ensure juror eligibility and representativeness of the specified venue. In small venues where large representative sampling is not feasible, we use a technique called matched-sampling, which essentially means we recruit people from other venues with matching demographics to your venue.

Typically 2-4 weeks, depending on how fast the fact pattern and questionnaires are finalized.

Yes, for MOST cases. Our method for synopsizing a case is the industry standard for this tool, and has been well-supported in the empirical peer-reviewed literature. We provide guides & samples to help you draft the fact pattern according to best practices.

We use an advanced statistical simulation technique, known as a resampling method, to analyze and predict potential damage awards.

First, we select 12 damage awards at random and establish an average damage award for that jury. Then, we replicate this process a 1,000 times, each time providing a snapshot of a unique jury's judgment on damages. These simulations culminate in a robust, data-driven forecast, averaging out the 1,000 calculated awards to arrive at a figure that's not just a guess, but an informed, statistically sound prediction. This technique allows us to confidently estimate the range and likelihood of potential damage awards, offering you a powerful strategic advantage.

The juror profile is the analysis that allows us to better answer questions about WHO we will see in jury selection, from the most problematic for your side to the most favorable, as well as those on-the-fence. With a large sample size, we will have enough data to find the patterns of characteristics to better segment the population in terms of biases and likelihood to favor one side over the other. With answers to these questions, we create a juror profile to inform your strike strategy and prioritize your questions on the juror questionnaire and in voir dire.

This analysis reports feedback on how strongly jurors respond to specific issues and arguments made from either side. This tool provides empirical insight into the strength and rank of case issues/arguments relative to others made in the case.

A/B testing in jury research is like setting up a controlled experiment to see what influences a jury's decision-making process. Imagine you're trying to decide the best way to present a case, or whether or not you should include something. You could create two different versions– let's call them A and B. Each one presents a different scenario:

Scenario A might use one theme for the case with specific evidence and witness testimony, while B uses another theme with different evidence or testimony. You might even show two different amounts of money you're asking for in damages to see what the jury thinks is fair. Based on their responses, you can see which version is more effective.

For example, if more people find the argument in survey A more convincing, or if they agree with the damage amount suggested in survey B, it gives you solid evidence to decide which strategy might be more successful in court.

Essentially, it is a condensed mock trial in the form of an online case-study survey design, in which a larger number of jury-eligible participants read a synopsized fact pattern of your case (rather than watch live presentations) and answer questions about their background, attitudes, and verdict judgement.

Unlike a mock trial or focus group, the strengths of this research design, besides high-quality data, are sample size, speed and affordability.

The large sample size (n=100) gives us greater validity and reliability in our results and predictions. And the virtual design allows for faster and more affordable data collection.

Absolutely. We can help with drafting the fact pattern and questionnaires for an additional $250/hour.

VedictSimulator is led by Sean Chacon. Leveraging nearly a decade of experience as a jury consultant and his doctoral education, Sean developed and refined his method for accurately estimating damage outcomes and juror profiles.