IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/b/mtp/titles/0262072750.html
   My bibliography  Save this book

Heuristics and the Law

Editor

Listed:
  • Gerd Gigerenzer
    (Max Planck Institute for Human Development)

  • Christoph Engel
    (Max Planck Institute for Human Development)

Abstract

In recent decades, the economists' concept of rational choice has dominated legal reasoning. And yet, in practical terms, neither the lawbreakers the law addresses nor officers of the law behave as the hyperrational beings postulated by rational choice. Critics of rational choice and believers in "fast and frugal heuristics" propose another approach: using certain formulations or general principles (heuristics) to help navigate in an environment that is not a well-ordered setting with an occasional disturbance, as described in the language of rational choice, but instead is fundamentally uncertain or characterized by an unmanageable degree of complexity. This is the intuition behind behavioral law and economics. In Heuristics and the Law, experts in law, psychology, and economics explore the conceptual and practical power of the heuristics approach in law. They discuss legal theory; modeling and predicting the problems the law purports to solve; the process of making law, in the legislature or in the courtroom; the application of existing law in the courts, particularly regarding the law of evidence; and implementation of the law and the impact of law on behavior.

Suggested Citation

  • Gerd Gigerenzer & Christoph Engel (ed.), 2006. "Heuristics and the Law," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262072750, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:mtp:titles:0262072750
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Dorian Jullien & Nicolas Vallois, 2014. "A probabilistic ghost in the experimental machine," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(3), pages 232-250, September.
    2. Jack Vromen, 2007. "Neuroeconomics as a Natural Extension of Bioeconomics: The Shifting Scope of Standard Economic Theory," Journal of Bioeconomics, Springer, vol. 9(2), pages 145-167, August.
    3. Marco Tagliabue & Ingunn Sandaker & Gunnar Ree, 2017. "The value of contingencies and schedules of reinforcement: Fundamentals of behavior analysis contributing to the efficacy of behavioral business research," Journal of Behavioral Economics for Policy, Society for the Advancement of Behavioral Economics (SABE), vol. 1(S), pages 33-39, November.
    4. Lucia A. Reisch & Andreas Oehler, 2009. "Behavioral Economics: eine neue Grundlage für die Verbraucherpolitik?," Vierteljahrshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung / Quarterly Journal of Economic Research, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 78(3), pages 30-43.
    5. repec:cup:judgdm:v:15:y:2020:i:3:p:312-329 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Engel, Christoph & Weber, Elke U., 2007. "The impact of institutions on the decision how to decide," Journal of Institutional Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 3(3), pages 323-349, December.
    7. Bob M Fennis & Tor W Andreassen & Line Lervik-Olsen, 2015. "Behavioral Disinhibition Can Foster Intentions to Healthy Lifestyle Change by Overcoming Commitment to Past Behavior," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(11), pages 1-12, November.
    8. Christoph Engel & Werner Gueth, 2018. "Modeling a satisficing judge," Rationality and Society, , vol. 30(2), pages 220-246, May.
    9. Michal Ovádek, 2019. "The apolitical lawyer: experimental evidence of a framing effect," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 48(3), pages 385-415, December.
    10. Joan Josep Vallbé & Carmen Ramírez‐Folch, 2023. "The effect of judges' gender on decisions regarding intimate‐partner violence," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(3), pages 641-668, September.
    11. Martin Gelter & Kristoffel Grechenig, 2014. "History of Law and Economics," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2014_05, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods.
    12. Constanza Blanco Barón, 2019. "Discusiones contemporáneas del derecho económico. Serie de derecho Económico n.° 4," Books, Universidad Externado de Colombia, Facultad de Derecho, number 1117, December.
    13. Noel Struchiner & Ivar R. Hannikainen & Guilherme da F. C. F. de Almeida, 2020. "An experimental guide to vehicles in the park," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 15(3), pages 312-329, May.
    14. Christoph Engel, 2018. "Empirical Methods for the Law," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 174(1), pages 5-23, March.
    15. Christoph Engel, 2007. "Institutions for Intuitive Man," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2007_12, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods.
    16. Christian Hofmann & Hans-Ulrich Küpper, 2011. "Neurobiologie und Unternehmensrechnung," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 63(63), pages 168-196, January.
    17. Riccardo Viale, 2018. "The normative and descriptive weaknesses of behavioral economics-informed nudge: depowered paternalism and unjustified libertarianism," Mind & Society: Cognitive Studies in Economics and Social Sciences, Springer;Fondazione Rosselli, vol. 17(1), pages 53-69, November.
    18. María Laura Manrique [y otros] & Federico José Arena (editor) & Pau Luque (editor) & Diego Moreno Cruz (editor), 2021. "Razonamiento jurídico y ciencias cognitivas," Books, Universidad Externado de Colombia, Facultad de Derecho, number 1293, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    heuristics; law;

    JEL classification:

    • K0 - Law and Economics - - General

    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:mtp:titles:0262072750. 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: Kristin Waites (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://mitpress.mit.edu .

    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.