Adversarial versus Inquisitorial Testimony
AbstractAn arbiter can decide a case on the basis of his priors, or the two parties to the conflict may present further evidence. The parties may misrepresent evidence in their favor at a cost. At equilibrium the two parties never testify together. When the evidence is much in favor of one party, this party testifies. When the evidence is close to the prior mean, no party testifies. We compare this outcome under a purely adversarial procedure with the outcome under a purely inquisitorial procedure (Emons and Fluet 2009). We provide sufficient conditions on when one procedure is better than the other one.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers in its series CEPR Discussion Papers with number 7476.
Date of creation: Sep 2009
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: Centre for Economic Policy Research, 77 Bastwick Street, London EC1V 3PZ
Phone: 44 - 20 - 7183 8801
Fax: 44 - 20 - 7183 8820
Other versions of this item:
- D82 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Asymmetric and Private Information; Mechanism Design
- K41 - Law and Economics - - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior - - - Litigation Process
- K42 - Law and Economics - - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior - - - Illegal Behavior and the Enforcement of Law
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2009-11-27 (All new papers)
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Dominique Demougin & Claude Fluet, 2007.
"Rules of Proof, Courts, and Incentives,"
CESifo Working Paper Series
2014, CESifo Group Munich.
- Claude Fluet, 2009.
"Accuracy Versus Falsification Costs: The Optimal Amount of Evidence under Different Procedures,"
Journal of Law, Economics and Organization,
Oxford University Press, vol. 25(1), pages 134-156, May.
- Emons, Winand & Fluet, Claude, 2007. "Accuracy versus Falsification Costs: The Optimal Amount of Evidence under Different Procedures," CEPR Discussion Papers 6150, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Winand Emons & Claude Fluet, 2007. "Accuracy versus Falsification Costs: The optimal Amount of Evidence under different Procedures," Diskussionsschriften dp0702, Universitaet Bern, Departement Volkswirtschaft.
- Winand Emons & Claude Fluet, 2007. "Accuracy versus Falsification Costs: the Optimal Amount of Evidence under Different Procedures," Cahiers de recherche 0703, CIRPEE.
- Farmer, Amy & Pecorino, Paul, 1999. " Legal Expenditure as a Rent-Seeking Game," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 100(3-4), pages 271-88, September.
- Kyle Bagwell & Garey Ramey, 1989.
"Oligopoly Limit Pricing,"
829, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
- Lacker, J.M., 1989.
"Optimal Contracts Under Costly State Falsification,"
Purdue University Economics Working Papers
956, Purdue University, Department of Economics.
- Lacker, Jeffrey M & Weinberg, John A, 1989. "Optimal Contracts under Costly State Falsification," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 97(6), pages 1345-63, December.
- Navin Kartik, 2009.
"Strategic Communication with Lying Costs,"
Review of Economic Studies,
Oxford University Press, vol. 76(4), pages 1359-1395.
- Froeb, Luke M & Kobayashi, Bruce H, 1996. "Naive, Biased, Yet Bayesian: Can Juries Interpret Selectively Produced Evidence?," Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 12(1), pages 257-76, April.
- Froeb, Luke M. & Kobayashi, Bruce H., 2001. "Evidence production in adversarial vs. inquisitorial regimes," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 267-272, February.
- Winand Emons & Claude Fluet, 2009.
"Non-comparative versus Comparative Advertising as a Quality Signal,"
Cahiers de recherche
- Winand Emons & Claude Fluet, 2008. "Non-comparative versus Comparative Advertising as a Quality Signal," Diskussionsschriften dp0805, Universitaet Bern, Departement Volkswirtschaft.
- Emons, Winand & Fluet, Claude, 2009. "Non-comparative versus Comparative Advertising as a Quality Signal," CEPR Discussion Papers 7109, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Emons, Winand & Fluet, Claude, 2011. "Non-comparative versus Comparative Advertising as a Quality Signal," Annual Conference 2011 (Frankfurt, Main): The Order of the World Economy - Lessons from the Crisis 48713, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
- Daughety, Andrew F & Reinganum, Jennifer F, 2000. "On the Economics of Trials: Adversarial Process, Evidence, and Equilibrium Bias," Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 16(2), pages 365-94, October.
- Christian Schultz, 1997.
"Limit Pricing when Incumbents have Conflicting Interests,"
CIE Discussion Papers
1997-17, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics. Centre for Industrial Economics.
- Schultz, Christian, 1999. "Limit pricing when incumbents have conflicting interests," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 17(6), pages 801-825, August.
- Fluet, Claude & Garella, Paolo G., 2002.
"Advertising and prices as signals of quality in a regime of price rivalry,"
International Journal of Industrial Organization,
Elsevier, vol. 20(7), pages 907-930, September.
- Claude Fluet & Paolo G. Garella, 1999. "Advertising and Prices as Signals of Quality in a Regime of Price Rivalry," Cahiers de recherche du DÃ©partement des sciences Ã©conomiques, UQAM 9903, Université du Québec à Montréal, Département des sciences économiques.
- Hyun Song Shin, 1998. "Adversarial and Inquisitorial Procedures in Arbitration," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 29(2), pages 378-405, Summer.
- Palumbo, Giuliana, 2001. "Trial procedures and optimal limits on proof-taking10," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 309-327, September.
- Mark N. Hertzendorf & Per Baltzer Overgaard, 2001. "Price Competition and Advertising Signals: Signaling by Competing Senders," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 10(4), pages 621-662, December.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ().
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.