Prospect Theory, Risk Preference, and the Law

IF 2 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW Northwestern University Law Review Pub Date : 2002-10-31 DOI:10.2139/SSRN.344600
C. Guthrie
{"title":"Prospect Theory, Risk Preference, and the Law","authors":"C. Guthrie","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.344600","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"To understand how people behave in an uncertain world - and to make viable recommendations about how the law should try to shape that behavior - legal scholars must employ a model or theory of decision making. Only with an understanding of how people are likely to respond to legal rules can legal scholars, judges, legislators, and regulators craft rules that are likely to encourage desirable behavior and discourage undesirable behavior. Rather than rely on rational choice theory, behavioral law and economics scholars (or legal decision theorists) have turned to Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky's \"prospect theory\" to inform their analyses of law and legal behavior. Prospect theory contains several empirical propositions relevant to legal analysis, but this paper focuses primarily on prospect theory's insight that people often make risk-averse choices when selecting between \"gains\" and risk-seeking choices when selecting between \"losses.\" The paper surveys efforts in the legal literature to use this insight to inform the way legal scholars think about law and behavior in several doctrinal areas. The paper acknowledges some limitations associated with this work (e.g., external validity, differences in individual decision making, differences in group vs. individual decision making), but it concludes that prospect theory is nonetheless a valuable tool for legal scholars and policy makers.","PeriodicalId":47587,"journal":{"name":"Northwestern University Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2002-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2139/SSRN.344600","citationCount":"65","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Northwestern University Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.344600","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 65

Abstract

To understand how people behave in an uncertain world - and to make viable recommendations about how the law should try to shape that behavior - legal scholars must employ a model or theory of decision making. Only with an understanding of how people are likely to respond to legal rules can legal scholars, judges, legislators, and regulators craft rules that are likely to encourage desirable behavior and discourage undesirable behavior. Rather than rely on rational choice theory, behavioral law and economics scholars (or legal decision theorists) have turned to Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky's "prospect theory" to inform their analyses of law and legal behavior. Prospect theory contains several empirical propositions relevant to legal analysis, but this paper focuses primarily on prospect theory's insight that people often make risk-averse choices when selecting between "gains" and risk-seeking choices when selecting between "losses." The paper surveys efforts in the legal literature to use this insight to inform the way legal scholars think about law and behavior in several doctrinal areas. The paper acknowledges some limitations associated with this work (e.g., external validity, differences in individual decision making, differences in group vs. individual decision making), but it concludes that prospect theory is nonetheless a valuable tool for legal scholars and policy makers.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
前景理论、风险偏好与法律
为了理解人们在一个不确定的世界中的行为,并就法律应该如何塑造这种行为提出可行的建议,法律学者必须采用一种决策模型或理论。只有了解了人们对法律规则的反应,法律学者、法官、立法者和监管者才能制定出可能鼓励可取行为和阻止不可取行为的规则。行为法和经济学学者(或法律决策理论家)不再依赖理性选择理论,而是转向丹尼尔·卡尼曼和阿莫斯·特沃斯基的“前景理论”,以指导他们对法律和法律行为的分析。前景理论包含了几个与法律分析相关的经验命题,但本文主要关注的是前景理论的洞见,即人们在选择“收益”时往往会做出风险厌恶的选择,在选择“损失”时往往会做出风险寻求的选择。本文调查了法律文献中使用这种见解来告知法律学者在几个理论领域思考法律和行为的方式的努力。本文承认与这项工作相关的一些局限性(例如,外部有效性,个人决策的差异,群体与个人决策的差异),但它得出的结论是,前景理论仍然是法律学者和政策制定者的宝贵工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
10.50%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The Northwestern University Law Review is a student-operated journal that publishes four issues of high-quality, general legal scholarship each year. Student editors make the editorial and organizational decisions and select articles submitted by professors, judges, and practitioners, as well as student pieces.
期刊最新文献
From the Spirit of the Federalist Papers to the End of Legitimacy: Reflections on Gundy V. United States A New Strategy for Regulating Arbitration Contract Governance in Small-World Networks: The Case of the Maghribi Traders Reconstituting We the People: Frederick Douglass and Jurgen Habermas in Conversation The Discriminatory Effects of the HUD Smoke-Free Policy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1