Health-Damaging Climate Events Highlight the Need for Interdisciplinary, Engaged Research.

In 2023 human populations experienced multiple record-breaking climate events, with widespread impacts on human health and well-being. These events include extreme heat domes, drought, severe storms, flooding, and wildfires. Due to inherent lags in the climate system, we can expect such extremes to continue for multiple decades after reaching net zero carbon emissions. Unfortunately, despite these significant current and future impacts, funding for research in climate and health has lagged behind that for other geoscience and biomedical research. While some initial efforts from funding agencies are evident, there is still a significant need to increase the resources available for multidisciplinary research in the face of this issue. As a group of experts at this important intersection, we call for a more concerted effort to encourage interdisciplinary and policy-relevant investigations into the detrimental health effects of continued climate change.

Strength of evidence, extraevidentiary influence, and the liberation hypothesis: data from the field.

To examine relationships between strength of evidence (SOE) and extraevidentiary variables in the context of Kalven and Zeisel's (The American Jury, 1966) liberation hypothesis, post-trial questionnaire data were collected from judges, attorneys, and jurors associated with 179 criminal jury trials. SOE ratings were strongly correlated with jury verdicts on the three most serious charges against the defendant, and several extraevidentiary variables (i.e., pretrial publicity, trial complexity, charge severity, and foreperson demographics) were moderately correlated with verdicts. Extraevidentiary-verdict relationships remained significant when SOE was controlled, although extraevidentiary variables yielded only modest improvement in classification accuracy beyond SOE. In partial support of the liberation hypothesis, several case-related extraevidentiary variables were significantly related to jury verdicts only when the prosecution's evidence was rated as moderately strong.

Fractional factorial designs for legal psychology.

Researchers considering novel or exploratory psycholegal research are often able to easily generate a sizable list of independent variables (IVs) that might influence a measure of interest. Where the research question is novel and the literature is not developed, however, choosing from among a long list of potential variables those worthy of empirical investigation often presents a formidable task. Many researchers may feel compelled by legal psychology's heavy reliance on full-factorial designs to narrow the IVs under investigation to two or three in order to avoid an expensive and unwieldy design involving numerous high-order interactions. This article suggests that fractional factorial designs provide a reasonable alternative to full-factorial designs in such circumstances because they allow the psycholegal researcher to examine the main effects of a large number of factors while disregarding high-order interactions. An introduction to the logic of fractional factorial designs is provided and several examples from the social sciences are presented.