Are All Legal Probabilities Created Equal?
Cataloging Information
Documentation, Data and Analysis
User Comments
 
Citation Information
How to Cite
Yuval Feldman ; Doron Teichman, "Are All Legal Probabilities Created Equal?", hdl:1902.1/12386 UNF:3:er9eYzxHpgaOJn5fQnKNfw==
Study Global Idhdl:1902.1/12386
AuthorsYuval Feldman (Bar-Ilan University); Doron Teichman (Hebrew University of Jerusalem)
Deposit DateFebruary 24, 2009
Provenance
Abstract and Scope
Abstract

At the core of the economic analysis of law lies the concept of expected sanctions, which are calculated by multiplying the sanction that is applied to wrongdoers by the probability that it will be applied. This probability is a result of several sequential probabilities that involve the different actors responsible for sanctioning wrongdoers (e.g. police, prosecutors, judges, jurors, etc.). Generally, legal economists treat different legal probabilities as fungible and simply multiply them much like any other sequential probabilistic situation. In this paper we challenge this assumption, and demonstrate that different types of legal probabilities are perceived by people as different and are expected to affect their behavior in distinct ways. More specifically, we show that uncertainty associated with legal ambiguity and uncertainty associated with imperfect enforcement should not be treated as equal.


To test these predictions, we designed a series of between-subjects experimental surveys that measured and compared participants’ attitudes toward compliance in conditions of uncertainty. We used a sample of several hundred students both from Israel and the United States who received a description of a hypothetical scenario in which the dimension that was manipulated was related to whether the source of uncertainty was in the legality of the behavior or in the likelihood of enforcement (while holding the expected sanction constant). Overall these studies confirmed our main hypothesis that people will comply less, when the source of uncertainty is in the law itself, in comparison to situations where the source of uncertainty is in enforcement but the illegality is clear.

Related Publications84 N.Y.U. L. Rev. (forthcoming Oct. 2009).
Kind of DataExperimental Data
Terms of Use
Network Terms of UseIQSS Dataverse Network Terms and Conditions

By downloading these Materials, I agree to the following:

  1. I will not use the Materials to
    1. obtain information that could directly or indirectly identify subjects.
    2. produce links among the Distributor's datasets or among the Distributor's data and other datasets that could identify individuals or organizations.
    3. obtain information about, or further contact with, subjects known to me except where the use and/or release of such identifying information has no potential for constituting an unwarranted invasion of privacy and/or breach of confidentiality.
  2. I agree not to download any Materials where prohibited by applicable law.
  3. I agree not to use the Materials in any way prohibited by applicable law.
  4. I agree that any books, articles, conference papers, theses, dissertations, reports, or other publications that I create which employ data reference the bibliographic citation accompanying this data. These citations include the data authors, data identifier, and other information accord with the Recommended Standard (http://thedata.org/citation/standard) for social science data.
  5. THE DISTRIBUTOR MAKES NO WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, BY OPERATION OF LAW OR OTHERWISE, REGARDING OR RELATING TO THE DATASET

BY CLICKING THE "I AGREE" CHECKBOX BELOW, I CONFIRM THAT I HAVE READ AND UNDERSTOOD EACH AND EVERY TERM SET FORTH IN THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR THE USE OF DATA FOUND ABOVE, AND I AGREE TO BE BOUND BY ALL OF SUCH TERMS AND CONDITIONS.

IF I DO NOT UNDERSTAND OR AGREE TO ALL OF THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS, I MUST NOT DOWNLOAD THE MATERIALS.