Law, economics, human behavior. Discussion about application of behavioral economics to analysis of law

Magdalena Małecka

doi:10.36280/afpifs.2011.1.15

Research article

Law, economics, human behavior. Discussion about application of behavioral economics to analysis of law

Magdalena Małecka

Prawo, ekonomia, ludzkie działanie. Dyskusja nad zastosowaniem ekonomii behawioralnej do analizy prawa

Archiwum Filozofii Prawa i Filozofii Społecznej, nr 1(2)/2011, s. 15-28

DOI 10.36280/afpifs.2011.1.15 ↗

Issue: nr 1(2)/2011
Pages: 15-28
Published: 2011
Article language: English

English

Abstract

Law & economics scholars have claimed, from the very beginning of the movement, that their ambition has been to make studies of law more scientific. The neoclassical approach in economic analysis of law is based on the assumption that rationality of people acting in legal contexts can be characterized in the same ways as rationality of homines economici. However, emergence of behavioral economics and attempts to apply it to analysis of law by some law & economics scholars resulted in critical revising the achievements of neoclassical approach. The so called behavioral law & economics criticizes the neoclassical approach on the basis of experiments, which test hypotheses derived from neoclassical theories. Outcomes of those experiments allow to draw conclusion that in many (legal) contexts people don’t behave in accordance with predictions based on neoclassical models. Behavioral law & economics scholars argue that neoclassical theories are grounded on so highly unrealistic assumptions that in many situations they cannot offer predictions of human behavior. I distinguish three main issues that are discussed: philosophical, methodological and normative ones. I formulate critical comments on the raised arguments and final general remarks concerning possibility of making legal studies more scientific, as well as application of economics to studies on law.

Keywords

behavioural law & economics
scientific study of law
legal theory
normative and methodological debate

Full text PDF How to cite

References

20 reference entries

References

Arlen, J. (1998). Comment: The future of behavioral economic analysis of law. Vanderbilt Law Review, 51, 1765-1795.
Bar-Gill, O. (2007-2008). The behavioral economics of consumer contracts. Minnesota Law Review, 92(3), 749-802.
Blaug, M. (1995). Metodologia ekonomii. Warszawa: PWN.
Faure, M. & van den Bergh R. (1989). Essays in law and economics. Antwerpen: Maklu.
Friedman, M. (1953). Essay on the Methodology of Positive Economics. In M. Friedman. (Ed.). Essays in Positive Economics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 3–43.
Gigerenzer, G. (2000). Adaptive thinking. Rationality in the real world. Oxford: Oxford Univerity Press.
Guthrie, Ch. (2000). Framing Frivolous Litigation: A Psychological Theory. The University of Chicago Law Review 67(1), 163-216.
Issacharoff, S. (1998). Can there be a behavioral law and economics?. Vanderbilt Law Review 51 (6), 1729-1745.
Jolls. Ch., & Sunstein C., & Thaler R. (1998). A behavioral approach to law and economics. Stanford Law Review 50(5), 1471-1489.
Jolls. Ch., & Sunstein C., & Thaler R. (1998). Theories and tropes: A reply to Posner and Kelman. Stanford Law Review 50(5), 1593-1608.
Kahneman. D. & Knetsch J.L. & Thaler R. (1991). The Endowment Effects, Loss Aversion and Status Quo Bias. Journal of Economic Perspectives 5(1), 193-206.
Langevoort. D.C. (1997). Organized Illusions: A Behavioral Theory of Why Corporations Mislead Stock Market Investors (and Cause Other Social Harms). University of Pennsylvania Law Review 146, 102-172.
Meier, S., Sprenger, Ch. (2007), Impatience and Credit Behavior: Evidence from a Field Experiment, Fed. Reserve Bank of Boston. Working Paper No. 07–03.
Nowak, L. (1977). Wstęp do idealizacyjnej teorii nauki. Warszawa: PWN.
Posner, R. (2001). Frontiers of Legal Theory, Cambridge, MA-London: Harvard University Press.
Rabin, M. (1993 ). Incorporating Fairness into Game Theory and Economics. American Economic Review 83(5), 1281-1302.
Rachlinski, J.J. (1998). A Positive Psychological Theory of Judging in Hindsight. The University of Chicago Law Review 65(2), 571-625.
Simon, H. (1982). Models of bounded rationality. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Kahneman, D., Tersky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47(2), 263-291.
Ulen T. (1998). The growing pains of behavioral law and economics. Vanderbilt Law Review 51 (6), 1747-1763.

Publication information

Author and affiliation

Magdalena Małecka

Polska Akademia Nauk

ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5395-9256

Issue data

Issue nr 1(2)/2011

Pages: 15-28
Published: 2011
DOI: 10.36280/afpifs.2011.1.15
PDF: Full text PDF

AccessOtwarty LicenceCC BY 4.0 ↗

How to cite

Bibliographic description and verified export formats.

Format AFPiFS

M. Małecka, Law, economics, human behavior. Discussion about application of behavioral economics to analysis of law, „Archiwum Filozofii Prawa i Filozofii Społecznej” nr 1(2)/2011, s. 15–28, DOI: 10.36280/afpifs.2011.1.15

Export citation data

[ref-001] Arlen, J. (1998). Comment: The future of behavioral economic analysis of law. Vanderbilt Law Review, 51, 1765-1795.

[ref-002] Bar-Gill, O. (2007-2008). The behavioral economics of consumer contracts. Minnesota Law Review, 92(3), 749-802.

[ref-003] Blaug, M. (1995). Metodologia ekonomii. Warszawa: PWN.

[ref-004] Faure, M. & van den Bergh R. (1989). Essays in law and economics. Antwerpen: Maklu.

[ref-005] Friedman, M. (1953). Essay on the Methodology of Positive Economics. In M. Friedman. (Ed.). Essays in Positive Economics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 3–43.

[ref-006] Gigerenzer, G. (2000). Adaptive thinking. Rationality in the real world. Oxford: Oxford Univerity Press.

[ref-007] Guthrie, Ch. (2000). Framing Frivolous Litigation: A Psychological Theory. The University of Chicago Law Review 67(1), 163-216.

[ref-008] Issacharoff, S. (1998). Can there be a behavioral law and economics?. Vanderbilt Law Review 51 (6), 1729-1745.

[ref-009] Jolls. Ch., & Sunstein C., & Thaler R. (1998). A behavioral approach to law and economics. Stanford Law Review 50(5), 1471-1489.

[ref-010] Jolls. Ch., & Sunstein C., & Thaler R. (1998). Theories and tropes: A reply to Posner and Kelman. Stanford Law Review 50(5), 1593-1608.

[ref-011] Kahneman. D. & Knetsch J.L. & Thaler R. (1991). The Endowment Effects, Loss Aversion and Status Quo Bias. Journal of Economic Perspectives 5(1), 193-206.

[ref-012] Langevoort. D.C. (1997). Organized Illusions: A Behavioral Theory of Why Corporations Mislead Stock Market Investors (and Cause Other Social Harms). University of Pennsylvania Law Review 146, 102-172.

[ref-013] Meier, S., Sprenger, Ch. (2007), Impatience and Credit Behavior: Evidence from a Field Experiment, Fed. Reserve Bank of Boston. Working Paper No. 07–03.

[ref-014] Nowak, L. (1977). Wstęp do idealizacyjnej teorii nauki. Warszawa: PWN.

[ref-015] Posner, R. (2001). Frontiers of Legal Theory, Cambridge, MA-London: Harvard University Press.

[ref-016] Rabin, M. (1993 ). Incorporating Fairness into Game Theory and Economics. American Economic Review 83(5), 1281-1302.

[ref-017] Rachlinski, J.J. (1998). A Positive Psychological Theory of Judging in Hindsight. The University of Chicago Law Review 65(2), 571-625.

[ref-018] Simon, H. (1982). Models of bounded rationality. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

[ref-019] Kahneman, D., Tersky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47(2), 263-291.

[ref-020] Ulen T. (1998). The growing pains of behavioral law and economics. Vanderbilt Law Review 51 (6), 1747-1763.

Law, economics, human behavior. Discussion about application of behavioral economics to analysis of law

Abstract

Keywords

References

References

Publication information

Magdalena Małecka

Issue nr 1(2)/2011

How to cite

Format AFPiFS

ACM

ACS

APA

ABNT

Chicago

Harvard

IEEE

MLA

Turabian

Vancouver

OSCOLA

Export citation data