The structural difference
A mock trial is a dress rehearsal. Someone argues your side, someone argues theirs, jurors hear instructions, and the panel deliberates to a decision. The output is how a built case performs: verdict leanings, damages, and which arguments survived contact with the other side's best version.
A litigation focus group is a laboratory. A moderator walks the panel through facts, documents, photographs, or a single witness's story, and lets discussion run. The output is raw reaction: what people assume, what they want to know, which facts they seize on, and the language they use, which frequently becomes the language of your themes.
| Litigation focus group | Mock trial | |
|---|---|---|
| Structure | Moderated discussion, one-sided or neutral | Adversarial presentations, instructions, deliberation |
| Best timing | Early: case assessment, theme development | Late: testing the built case before trial or mediation |
| Answers | How do people react to these facts? What story do they tell themselves? | Does our case win? What does the panel award? Which arguments hold? |
| Typical cost | Lower per session; still recruited and moderated | $10,000 to $60,000+ for consultant-run exercises |
| Main risk | Reading exploratory chatter as a prediction | Spending the budget on the wrong version of the case |
Which to run, and when
- Facts are new and the story is unformed: focus group. You need reactions and vocabulary, and it is too early to grade a case you have not built.
- The case is built and trial or mediation is approaching: mock trial. Now the question is performance under adversarial pressure.
- Both, in sequence, is the classic consultant program when budget allows: explore, build, then test.
Where simulation collapses the choice
The choice between formats is mostly a budget constraint wearing a methodology costume. AI jury simulation runs both modes on the same panel: interview individual jurors about facts and exhibits the way a moderator would, and run the full adversarial case to deliberation the way a mock trial does. At roughly 10 to 20 percent of live cost, teams stop choosing and start sequencing: explore this week, test next month, rerun after every material change. The formats' live versions remain what they are; the economics are what changed.
Common questions
Is a focus group cheaper than a mock trial?
Generally yes, because it needs no adversarial presentations or deliberation staging. Recruited, moderated sessions still cost real money. The cost guide covers the ranges.
Can a focus group tell me my verdict?
No. It was never designed to. It tells you how people react to facts and themes. Verdict-shaped questions need an adversarial format with deliberation.
Do I need a consultant to run either?
For live formats, professional recruiting and moderation are most of the value; amateur versions mislead confidently. Simulated panels come with the structure built in.