IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/amlawe/v24y2022i1p171-202..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Settlement Negotiations with Reference-dependent Preferences
[Reference Points and Effort Provision]

Author

Listed:
  • Christoph Rössler
  • Tim Friehe

Abstract

This article analyzes pretrial bargaining between litigants with reference-dependent preferences. We build on Bebchuk (1984, “Litigation and Settlement under Imperfect Information,” 15 Rand Journal of Economics 404–15) and, motivated by empirical evidence, assume that the referent is based on expectations. We find that reference dependence on behalf of plaintiffs increases the settlement probability. The fact that preferences are reference-dependent meaningfully influences comparative statics predictions. In our extensions, we discuss the role of fee shifting, the effect of having the referent based on the status quo instead of on expectations, and risk aversion.

Suggested Citation

  • Christoph Rössler & Tim Friehe, 2022. "Settlement Negotiations with Reference-dependent Preferences [Reference Points and Effort Provision]," American Law and Economics Review, American Law and Economics Association, vol. 24(1), pages 171-202.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:amlawe:v:24:y:2022:i:1:p:171-202.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/aler/ahab015
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Hylton, Keith N., 2023. "Mutual optimism and risk preferences in litigation," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    D81; K41;

    JEL classification:

    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
    • K41 - Law and Economics - - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior - - - Litigation Process

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:amlawe:v:24:y:2022:i:1:p:171-202.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/aler .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.