To complement jury verdict analyses, a coordinated set of studies designed to determine how juries decide cases that involve business corporations was undertaken. It involved a juror interview study, a mock jury study, and a public opinion survey. The studies found that civil jurors are suspicious of plaintiffs who bring lawsuits against businesses; they examine plaintiffs' behavior and the circumstances of the case to determine the extent to which plaintiffs are partly or wholly responsible for their own injuries. Still, jurors may attribute less responsibility to the plaintiff who is injured in a business setting, reasoning that the business has a greater duty to see that its environment is safe. In general, corporations are more likely to be held responsible than individuals, even in similar circumstances. Differential treatment, however, does not apparently stem from anti-business prejudice, but rather a normative judgment that corporations have a greater degree of responsibility in society. Contrary to predictions of the "deep pockets" theory, the provision of financial information had no effect on judgments of negligence or recommended awards. Overall, the studies show that jurors reflect community notions of both individual and corporate responsibility in their judgments of the liability of business corporations. The civil jury responds to changing societal norms. 29 footnotes