An analysis of bounded rationality in judicial litigations: the case with loss/disappointment averses plaintiffs

Langlais, Eric (2010): An analysis of bounded rationality in judicial litigations: the case with loss/disappointment averses plaintiffs.

Abstract

For psychologists, bounded rationality reflects the presence of cognitive dissonance and/or inconsistency, revealing that people use heuristics (Tversky and Kahneman (1974)) rather than sophisticated processes for the assessment of their beliefs. Recent research analyzing litigations and pretrial negotiations also focused on boundedly rational litigants (Bar-Gill (2005), Farmer and Peccorino (2002)) relying on a naïve modelling of the self-serving bias. Our paper in contrast introduces the case for disappointment averse litigants, relying on the axiomatic of Gull (1991). We show that this leads to a richer analysis in comparative statics; at the same time, this proves to be … disappointing: for the purposes of public policies in favour of the access to justice, recommendations are quite ambiguous.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• English Title: An analysis of bounded rationality in judicial litigations: the case with loss/disappointment averse plaintiffs
• Language: English
• Keywords: conflicts, litigation, negotiation, disappointment aversion.
• Subjects: D - Microeconomics > D7 - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making > D74 - Conflict ; Conflict Resolution ; Alliances ; Revolutions; K - Law and Economics > K1 - Basic Areas of Law > K13 - Tort Law and Product Liability ; Forensic Economics; K - Law and Economics > K4 - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior > K41 - Litigation Process; K - Law and Economics > K3 - Other Substantive Areas of Law > K31 - Labor Law; C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C7 - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory > C72 - Noncooperative Games

References

Babcock L. and Loewenstein G. (1997). "Explaining bargaining impasse: the role of self serving bias", Journal of Economic Perspective 11, 109-126.

Bar-Gill O. (2002). “The success and survival of cautious optimism: legal rules and endogenous perceptions in pre-trial settlement negotiations”, Discussion Paper No. 375, John M. Olin Center for Law, Economics and Business, Harvard Law School.

Bar-Gill O. (2005). “The evolution and persistence of optimism in litigation”, Journal of Law, Economics & Organization 22, 490-507.

Bebchuk L. A. (1984). "Litigation and settlement under imperfect information", Rand Journal of Economics 15, 404-415.

Daughety A. (2000). “Settlement”, in : B. Bouckaert, G. De Geest, Encyclopedia of Law and Economics, Cheltenham, UK, Edward Elgar.

Farber H. and Bazerman M. (1987). “Why is there disagreement in bargaining”, American Economic Reviewl 77, 347-352.

Farmer A. and Pecorino P. (2002). “Pretrial bargaining with self-serving bias and asymmetric information”, Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 48, 163-176.

Grant S., Kajii A. and Pollak B. (2001). “Different notions of disappointment aversion”, Economics Letters 70, 203-208. Gul F. (1991). "A theory of disappointment aversion", Econometrica 59, 667-686.

Hausken K. (2005). "The battle of the sex with the future is important", Economics Letters, vol 87, pp 89-93.

Ichino A., Polo M. and Rettore E. (2003). “Are judges biased by labor market conditions?”, European Economic Review 47, 913-944.

Langlais E. and Chappe N. (2009). “Analyse économique de la résolution des litiges”, chapter 4 in: Analyse Economique du Droit – Principes, Méthodes, Résultats, B. Deffains and

E . Langlais (Eds), de Boeck Université. Marinescu I. (2005). “Are judges sensitive to economic conditions? Evidence from UK employment tribunals”, Working paper, London School of Economics.

Priest G.L. and Klein B. (1984). “The selection of disputes for litigation”, Journal of Legal Studies 13, 155.

Rachlinski J., Guthrie C. and Wistrich H. (2007). ”Heuristics and Biases in Specialized Judges : The Case of Bankruptcy Judges”, Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics 163, 167-198.

Schmidt U. and Zank H. (2005). "What is loss aversion?", Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 30, 157-167.

Shavell S. (1982). “Suits, settlement and trial: a theoretical analysis under alternative methods for the allocation of legal costs”, Journal of Legal Studies.11, 55-81.

Tversky A. and Kahneman D. (1974). “Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases”, Science 185, 1124-1131.

Viscusi K. (2001). "Jurors, judges and the mistreatment of risk by the courts", Journal of Legal Studies 30, 107-142.