Natalie Gordon, Ph.D., is a Consultant at DOAR. She conducts jury research and provides strategic analysis for clients in support of civil and criminal cases. Natalie has contributed to matters such as In Re: National Prescription Opioid Litigation, U.S. v Boustani, U.S. v Calk, U.S. v Gatto, U.S. v Middendorf, Ambac v. Countrywide, Irving H Picard v RAR Entrepreneurial Fund Ltd et al, Frank Darabont and CAA v. AMC Network Entertainment, and Tinder v. Match.
Natalie holds a Ph.D. in psychology and law with a dual specialization in basic and applied social psychology from John Jay College of Criminal Justice. She also holds a Bachelor of Arts degree in psychology and philosophy from the University of California, Santa Barbara, and a Master’s degree in experimental psychology from the University of Colorado.
Natalie’s dissertation research was funded by the National Science Foundation and focused on jurors’ ability to accurately report on their ability to be fair and impartial because of exposure to pretrial publicity during rehabilitative voir dire. As a result of her work, Natalie was awarded CUNY’s Presidential Prize for Public Communication. Natalie has also conducted research on attributions of liability in cases involving proximal and distal causes, how jurors’ collaboratively recall evidence during jury deliberations, and the effects of a gene-environment explanation of the defendant’s behavior on jurors’ sentencing decisions in capital cases. Additionally, Natalie has published theoretical papers on the utility of experts testifying in the “hot tub,” issues surrounding the legal concept of “actus reus,” and using small group research to inform settlement decisions. She has been published in both academic and legal journals as well as Law360. Natalie also serves as an adjunct professor at John Jay where she has taught courses in psychology and law, social psychology, and research methods.