Law & Psychology eJournal最新文献_第5页

Behavioral Antitrust: A New Approach to the Rule of Reason after Leegin 行为反垄断:Leegin之后理性规则的新途径

Law & Psychology eJournal Pub Date : 2009-12-01 DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.1522948

Avishalom Tor, William J. Rinner

{"title":"Behavioral Antitrust: A New Approach to the Rule of Reason after Leegin","authors":"Avishalom Tor, William J. Rinner","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1522948","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1522948","url":null,"abstract":"The Supreme Court’s recent decision in Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. v. PSKS, Inc., which replaced the longstanding per-se rule against resale price maintenance (RPM) with a rule of reason approach, has resurrected the debate over RPM. Legal and economic proponents of this practice again point to its potential procompetitive benefits, while RPM detractors emphasize its possible anticompetitive consequences. Despite their disagreements regarding the overall RPM evaluation, however, scholars, the Court, and the limited empirical data appear near-unanimous in agreeing that such arrangements can either increase or decrease efficiency. Consequently, the RPM debate predominantly revolves around theoretical assertions regarding the likely frequency and significance of RPM's pro- versus anti-competitive manifestations. Importantly, however, all of these theories also assume – like traditional antitrust scholarship more generally – that manufacturers are strictly rational actors, who employ only profit-maximizing arrangements. In contrast, a behavioral analysis suggests that real-world, boundedly-rational manufacturers are prone to overuse RPM, at times harming consumers. The available evidence reveals this excessive reliance on RPM slowly diminishes over time, as biased manufacturers are taught or disciplined by the market. The slow demise of this practice, however, may entail significant efficiency losses over many years. Yet because RPM will sometimes be procompetitive, Leegin's rejection of its per-se condemnation in favor of a rule of reason analysis is still justified. The present analysis therefore not only offers a novel account of resale price maintenance, but also shows how boundedly rational RPM challenges the various post-Leegin approaches developed by some courts, enforcement agencies, and scholars on both sides of the RPM debate. We close by outlining our alternative, behaviorally informed, structured rule of reason inquiry for this restraint.","PeriodicalId":191231,"journal":{"name":"Law & Psychology eJournal","volume":"92 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2009-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124102466","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 17

Social Norms and Behavior in the Local Commons Through the Lens of Field Experiments 从田野实验的视角看地方公地的社会规范与行为

Law & Psychology eJournal Pub Date : 2009-11-23 DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.1543821

Juan-Camilo Cardenas

{"title":"Social Norms and Behavior in the Local Commons Through the Lens of Field Experiments","authors":"Juan-Camilo Cardenas","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1543821","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1543821","url":null,"abstract":"Behavior in the local commons is usually embedded in a context of regulations and social norms that the group of users face. Such norms and rules affect how individuals value material and non-material incentives and therefore determine their decision to cooperate or over extract the resources from the common-pool. This paper discusses the importance of social norms in shaping behavior in the commons through the lens of experiments, and in particular experiments conducted in the field with people that usually face these social dilemmas in their daily life. Through a large sample of experimental sessions with around one thousand people between villagers and students, I test some hypothesis about behavior in the commons when regulations and social norms constrain the choices of people. The results suggest that people evaluate several components of the intrinsic and material motivations in their decision to cooperate. While responding in the expected direction to a imperfectly monitored fine on over extraction, the expected cost of the regulation is not a sufficient explanatory factor for the changes in behavior by the participants in the experiments. Even with zero cost of violations, people can respond positively to an external regulator that issues a normative statement about a rule that is aimed at solving the social dilemma.","PeriodicalId":191231,"journal":{"name":"Law & Psychology eJournal","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2009-11-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115890745","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 2

On Probation - An Experimental Analysis 关于缓刑——一个实验分析

Law & Psychology eJournal Pub Date : 2009-11-20 DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.1428407

C. Engel, Heike Hennig�?Schmidt, Bernd Irlenbusch, Sebastian Kube

引用次数: 0

Information Disclosure, Cognitive Biases and Payday Borrowing 信息披露、认知偏差与发薪日借款

Law & Psychology eJournal Pub Date : 2009-10-01 DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.1533012

Marianne Bertrand, Adair Morse

{"title":"Information Disclosure, Cognitive Biases and Payday Borrowing","authors":"Marianne Bertrand, Adair Morse","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1533012","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1533012","url":null,"abstract":"If people face cognitive limitations or biases that lead to financial mistakes, what are possible ways lawmakers can help? One approach is to remove the option of the bad decision; another approach is to increase financial education such that individuals can reason through choices when they arise. A third, less discussed, approach is to mandate disclosure of information in a form that enables people to overcome limitations or biases at the point of the decision. This third approach is the topic of this paper. We study whether and what information can be disclosed to payday loan borrowers to lower their use of high-cost debt via a field experiment at a national chain of payday lenders. We find that information that helps people think less narrowly (over time) about the cost of payday borrowing, and in particular information that reinforces the adding-up effect over pay cycles of the dollar fees incurred on a payday loan, reduces the take-up of payday loans by about 10 percent in a 4 month-window following exposure to the new information. Overall, our results suggest that consumer information regulations based on a deeper understanding of cognitive biases might be an effective policy tool when it comes to regulating payday borrowing, and possibly other financial and non-financial products.","PeriodicalId":191231,"journal":{"name":"Law & Psychology eJournal","volume":"24 28","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2009-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"120837276","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 464

Thoughts Versus Deeds: Folk Beliefs About Intentionality and Mens Rea 思想与行为:民间关于意向性与主观动机的信仰

Law & Psychology eJournal Pub Date : 2009-07-14 DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.1434120

N. McNichols, Jennifer L. Fortune, Jason E. Plaks

引用次数: 0

Empathy and Collective Action 共情与集体行动

Law & Psychology eJournal Pub Date : 2009-04-08 DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.1375059

P. Zak, Jorge A. Barraza

引用次数: 2

Expanded Rationality: From the Preferred to the Desirable, with Some Implications for Law 扩展理性:从首选到理想，及其对法律的启示

Law & Psychology eJournal Pub Date : 2008-12-10 DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.1317293

A. Licht

引用次数: 1

Behavioral Criminal Law and Economics 行为刑法与经济学“，

Law & Psychology eJournal Pub Date : 2008-11-11 DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.1299963

Richard Mcadams, T. Ulen

引用次数: 36

A Moody View of the Law: Looking Back and Looking Ahead at Law and the Emotions 喜怒无常的法律观:回顾与展望法律与情感

Law & Psychology eJournal Pub Date : 2008-04-01 DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4419-0696-0_7

Jeremy A. Blumenthal

引用次数: 5

Bounded Rationality and Legal Scholarship 有限理性与法律学术

Law & Psychology eJournal Pub Date : 2008-02-19 DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.1095874

M. Adler

{"title":"Bounded Rationality and Legal Scholarship","authors":"M. Adler","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1095874","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1095874","url":null,"abstract":"Decision theory seems to offer a very attractive normative framework for individual and social choice under uncertainty. The decisionmaker should think of her choice situation, at any given moment, in terms of a set of possible outcomes, that is, specifications of the possible consequences of choice, described in light of the decisionmaker's goals; a set of possible actions; and a \"state set\" consisting of possible prior \"states of the world.\" It is this framework for choice which provides the foundation for expected utility theory, as demonstrated in the work of Leonard Savage. Problems arise, however, when the decisionmaker is boundedly rational: when the mental process of thinking about outcomes, actions, and states is itself expensive and time consuming. In the case of the unboundedly rational decisionmaker, decision theory enjoins her to employ maximally specific outcomes; to consider all possible actions; and to use a set of mutually exclusive and collective exhaustive states, each of which is sufficiently finely specified so that each action, together with each state, yields one and only one maximally specific outcome. In the case of the boundedly rational decisionmaker, this procedure is either infeasible or, if feasible, irrational. This paper presents the problem of bounded rationality. It surveys possible solutions, none of which are found to be attractive. And it concludes by discussing the difficulties that the problem of bounded rationality poses for the welfarist program for legal scholarship presented by Louis Kaplow and Steven Shavell in their book, Fairness versus Welfare.","PeriodicalId":191231,"journal":{"name":"Law & Psychology eJournal","volume":"3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2008-02-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114477143","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1