Development of the Lost Pleasure of Life scale.

Andrews, Paul W.; Meyer, Robert G.; Berla, Edward P.

doi:10.1007/bf01499134

Cited by 6 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, Andrews et al (1996) developed a "Lost-Pleasure-of-Life" scale by having practicing psychologists who were experienced in disability evaluation judge the severity of impact that a large number of behavioral descriptors of impairment (e.g., loss of bladder control, inability to play with children) would have on a person's enjoyment of life. The specifi c impairments clustered into four areas of functioning: practical (e.g., diffi culty writing), emotional/psychological (e.g., sleep disruption), social (e.g., decreased participation in previously rewarding activities), and occupational (e.g., loss of vocational identity).…”

Section: Conducting Research On Hedonic Damagesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring damages for lost enjoyment of life: The view from the bench and the jury box.

Poser¹,

Bornstein²,

McGorty³

2003

Law and Human Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Civil jury instructions are inconsistent in defining what constitutes noneconomic damages, which may include pain, suffering, disability, disfigurement, and loss of enjoyment of life (LEL), among other injury sequelae. This inconsistency has been manifested recently in court decisions that have considered whether LEL should be treated as a separate element of noneconomic damages, distinct from pain and suffering. This paper reviews the case law on this issue and also describes a jury simulation experiment. Mock jurors awarded damages after they received instructions on noneconomic damages in which LEL was ( 1) not identified as a distinct element of damages; (2) defined as an element of damages distinct from pain and suffering, but participants awarded a single amount for noneconomic damages; or (3) defined as a distinct element of damages, and participants awarded separate amounts for LEL and pain and suffering. Instructions about LEL resulted in larger awards, but only when mock jurors also made a separate award for that element of damages.

show abstract

Section: Conducting Research On Hedonic Damagesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring damages for lost enjoyment of life: The view from the bench and the jury box.

Poser¹,

Bornstein²,

McGorty³

2003

Law and Human Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Vignettes. We used two vignettes created by Andrews et al (1996) to develop the Lost Pleasure of Life scale. The vignettes included descriptions of victims' functional capacities in the four domains related to hedonic loss and adaption: (a) practical, that is, activities of daily living; (b) emotional/psychological; (c) social, that is, interpersonal and leisure pursuits; and (d) occupational, that is, vocational activities and identity.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Obviously, it is difficult to find physical and psychological injuries of comparable severity, given the subjective nature of this perception (Vallano, 2013) and the fact that physical injuries can have psychological sequelae and vice versa. Thus, we used scenarios developed by Andrews (1993) and employed by Andrews, Meyer, and Berlá (1996) to ascertain mental health professionals’ ratings of the lost enjoyment of life experienced by people suffering from various injuries. We selected scenarios that depicted two types of primarily physical injuries and two types of primarily psychological injuries, with one of each type involving an injury that mental health professionals rated as causing moderate long-term hedonic loss and the other as causing mild long-term hedonic loss.…”

Section: Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

Affective forecasting about hedonic loss and adaptation: Implications for damage awards.

Greene

Sturm

Evelo

2016

Law and Human Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In tort lawsuits, plaintiffs may seek damages for loss of enjoyment of life, so-called hedonic loss, which occurred as a result of an accident or injury. In 2 studies, we examined how people judge others' adaptation and hedonic loss after an injury. Laypeople's forecasts of hedonic loss are relevant to concerns about whether jurors appropriately compensate plaintiffs. Longitudinal data of subjective well-being (e.g., Binder & Coad, 2013) show that hedonic loss is domain-specific: Many physical impairments (e.g., strokes) inflict less hedonic loss than many persistent yet invisible ailments (e.g., mental illness and conditions that cause chronic pain). We used vignette methodology to determine whether laypeople (n = 68 community members and 65 students in Study 1; 87 community members and 93 students in Study 2) and rehabilitation professionals (n = 47 in Study 2) were aware of this fact. In Study 1, participants' ratings of hedonic loss subsequent to a physical injury and a comparably severe psychological impairment did not differ. In Study 2, ratings of short- and long-term hedonic loss stemming from paraplegia and chronic back pain showed that neither laypeople nor professionals understood that hedonic loss is domain-specific. These findings imply that observers may forecast a future for people who suffered serious physical injuries as grimmer than it is likely to be, and a future for people who experience chronic pain and psychological disorders as rosier than is likely. (PsycINFO Database Record

show abstract

“…The vase was said to be damaged and someone else was at fault. In the same spirit of the Lost-Pleasureof-Life scale (Andrews, Meyer, & Berla, 1996), participants understood the assessed value of the vase to have been determined by an expert instead of an amount reported by its owner.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A behavioral account of compensation awarding decisions

Tsai

Hsee

2008

Behavioral Decision Making

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Suppose an individual loses an irreplaceable object and someone else is at fault. How much should he be compensated? Normatively, compensation should equal the value (utility) to the victim. Our experiments demonstrate that compensation decisions often ignore value and are instead based on cost (how much the victim originally paid for the item) except when cost is zero. For example, we found that people awarded $200 for a destroyed item worth $500 to the victim if the cost was $200; however, they awarded $500 if the original cost was zero. We explain these phenomena in terms of lay scientism (the tendency to base decisions on objective factors) and discuss how the prevalent cost-based compensation rule hurts consumer welfare. Copyright # 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.key words compensation; law; legal decision making; lay rationalism; consumer welfare; free; zero Suppose Mary has a technician set up cable service at her house. While working, he accidentally breaks a record by the Beatles that she bought a few years ago for $200. Mary, a dedicated Beatles fan, just rejected an offer of $500 for that record a week before the damage. The record is irreplaceable, and Mary states that she is willing to pay up to $500 for an identical record. In this scenario, the cable technician is fully responsible for the damage. How much compensation should the cable company award Mary in order to fully cover her loss? How might they quantify her welfare, the value that she places on the record? Effective and just compensation ought to make a person whole, restoring the injured party to the condition prior to the damage occurring. One way to achieve this would be to purchase an identical record for Mary. However, this is not an option when damage occurs to one-of-a-kind items not available on the market. Thus, we need an alternative means of compensation that provides an equitable replacement based on the subjective value of the item, not on its original cost.

show abstract

Development of the Lost Pleasure of Life scale.

Cited by 6 publications

References 18 publications

Measuring damages for lost enjoyment of life: The view from the bench and the jury box.

Measuring damages for lost enjoyment of life: The view from the bench and the jury box.

Affective forecasting about hedonic loss and adaptation: Implications for damage awards.

A behavioral account of compensation awarding decisions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About