Add to ORKGAre juries rational or irrational? In the context of punitive damage awards, jury decisions suffer from serious problems. Jurors are intuitive retributivists, in a way that produces departures from economic theories of punishment. Their decisions are rooted in outrage, which they cannot easily translate into dollar terms. The result is a degree of unpredictability and incoherence. An understanding of this point casts light on several problems with existing institutions and offers some clues about how those problems might be solved
In response to concerns that jury awards in tort cases are excessive and unpredictable, nearly every...
This paper presents the first empirical anatysis that demonstrates that juries differ from judges in...
In this paper we critique the increasingly prominent claims of punishment naturalism – the notion th...
Are juries rational or irrational? In the context of punitive damage awards, jury decisions suffer f...
Punitive damages have prompted much academic and political debate during the last twenty years. In t...
Punitive damages have prompted much academic and political debate during the last twenty years. In t...
This essay reviews Punitive Damages: How Juries Decide by Cass Sunstein, et al. The book provides a ...
In this Article, we argue that current debates on the legitimacy of punitive damages would benefit f...
This commentary examines the issue of judicial bias in response to the chapter, The Psychology of th...
This commentary examines the issue of judicial bias in response to the chapter, The Psychology of th...
This commentary examines the issue of judicial bias in response to the chapter, The Psychology of th...
This commentary examines the issue of judicial bias in response to the chapter, The Psychology of th...
This commentary examines the issue of judicial bias in response to the chapter, The Psychology of th...
Although punishment has been a crucial feature of every legal system, widespread disagreement exists...
In this paper we critique the increasingly prominent claims of punishment naturalism – the notion th...
In response to concerns that jury awards in tort cases are excessive and unpredictable, nearly every...
This paper presents the first empirical anatysis that demonstrates that juries differ from judges in...
In this paper we critique the increasingly prominent claims of punishment naturalism – the notion th...
Are juries rational or irrational? In the context of punitive damage awards, jury decisions suffer f...
Punitive damages have prompted much academic and political debate during the last twenty years. In t...
Punitive damages have prompted much academic and political debate during the last twenty years. In t...
This essay reviews Punitive Damages: How Juries Decide by Cass Sunstein, et al. The book provides a ...
In this Article, we argue that current debates on the legitimacy of punitive damages would benefit f...
This commentary examines the issue of judicial bias in response to the chapter, The Psychology of th...
This commentary examines the issue of judicial bias in response to the chapter, The Psychology of th...
This commentary examines the issue of judicial bias in response to the chapter, The Psychology of th...
This commentary examines the issue of judicial bias in response to the chapter, The Psychology of th...
This commentary examines the issue of judicial bias in response to the chapter, The Psychology of th...
Although punishment has been a crucial feature of every legal system, widespread disagreement exists...
In this paper we critique the increasingly prominent claims of punishment naturalism – the notion th...
In response to concerns that jury awards in tort cases are excessive and unpredictable, nearly every...
This paper presents the first empirical anatysis that demonstrates that juries differ from judges in...
In this paper we critique the increasingly prominent claims of punishment naturalism – the notion th...