Suppose we have different groups repeatedly making the same kind of decision (ex: awards in a civil lawsuit). We would like their decisions to be consistent and predictable, and are even willing to trade some accuracy to do so.

Social psychology has a lot of predictions about things that will influence a groups answer, and thus could affect consistency (ex: a confident person speaking first will sway the group enormously) (assuming that survived the replication crisis, which I haven't checked). What other problems and solutions does post-crisis social psychology suggest when trying to get consistent evaluations out of groups?