IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jcopol/v41y2018i1d10.1007_s10603-018-9370-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reducing Demand for Litigation in Consumer Disputes—a Randomized Field Experiment with Social Information

Author

Listed:
  • Andreas Maaløe Jespersen

    (Roskilde University)

Abstract

It has long been argued that alternative dispute resolution is superior to traditional court litigation. The paper reviews traditional and behavioural arguments and findings for why litigation rates remain high. The paper then reports on a natural field experiment designed to test how to improve disputes between consumers and businesses in Denmark resolution by including social information into the dispute process. The experiment demonstrates that social information significantly affects litigants’ need for litigation, but that the effect on settlement rates is non-significant. The results are discussed along with suggestions for possible future research into improving the willingness to cooperate in consumer disputes.

Suggested Citation

  • Andreas Maaløe Jespersen, 2018. "Reducing Demand for Litigation in Consumer Disputes—a Randomized Field Experiment with Social Information," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 41(1), pages 21-32, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:jcopol:v:41:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1007_s10603-018-9370-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s10603-018-9370-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10603-018-9370-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10603-018-9370-7?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Daniel Kahneman & Dan Lovallo, 1993. "Timid Choices and Bold Forecasts: A Cognitive Perspective on Risk Taking," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(1), pages 17-31, January.
    2. Linda Babcock & George Loewenstein, 1997. "Explaining Bargaining Impasse: The Role of Self-Serving Biases," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 11(1), pages 109-126, Winter.
    3. Bicchieri, Cristina & Erte, Xiao, 2007. "Do the right thing: But only if others do so," MPRA Paper 4609, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Cass R. Sunstein & Lucia A. Reisch, 2013. "Green by Default," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 66(3), pages 398-402, August.
    5. Glenn W. Harrison & John A. List, 2004. "Field Experiments," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 42(4), pages 1009-1055, December.
    6. Karakostas, Alexandros & Zizzo, Daniel John, 2016. "Compliance and the power of authority," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 67-80.
    7. Charness, Gary & Gneezy, Uri, 2000. "What’s in a Name? Anonymity and Social Distance in Dictator and Ultimatum Games," University of California at Santa Barbara, Economics Working Paper Series qt57q360q6, Department of Economics, UC Santa Barbara.
    8. John Beshears & James J. Choi & David Laibson & Brigitte C. Madrian, 2009. "The Importance of Default Options for Retirement Saving Outcomes: Evidence from the United States," NBER Chapters, in: Social Security Policy in a Changing Environment, pages 167-195, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Bicchieri,Cristina, 2006. "The Grammar of Society," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521574907, November.
    10. Charness, Gary & Gneezy, Uri, 2008. "What's in a name? Anonymity and social distance in dictator and ultimatum games," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 29-35, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Dan Rosendahl & Sirpa Rosendahl, 2022. "Role Stress - Experiences of Swedish Non-Lutheran Clergy," European Journal of Social Sciences Articles, Revistia Research and Publishing, vol. 5, ejss_v5_i.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bogliacino, Francesco & Codagnone, Cristiano, 2021. "Microfoundations, behaviour, and evolution: Evidence from experiments," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 372-385.
    2. Xiao, Erte, 2017. "Justification and conformity," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 15-28.
    3. Dimant, Eugen, 2015. "On Peer Effects: Behavioral Contagion of (Un)Ethical Behavior and the Role of Social Identity," MPRA Paper 68732, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. repec:cgr:cgsser:05-06 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Ben Greiner & Werner Güth & Ro’i Zultan, 2012. "Social communication and discrimination: a video experiment," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 15(3), pages 398-417, September.
    6. Jonathan Meer & Oren Rigbi, 2012. "Transactions Costs and Social Distance in Philanthropy: Evidence from a Field Experiment," Working Papers 1205, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Department of Economics.
    7. Bicchieri, Cristina & Dimant, Eugen & Gächter, Simon & Nosenzo, Daniele, 2022. "Social proximity and the erosion of norm compliance," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 59-72.
    8. Stefan Palan & Michael Kirchler, 2014. "Friendliness pays off! Monetary and Immaterial Gifts in Consumer-Salesperson Interactions," Working Papers 2014-31, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
    9. repec:unu:wpaper:wp2012-55 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Michael Kirchler & Stefan Palan, 2018. "Immaterial and monetary gifts in economic transactions: evidence from the field," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 21(1), pages 205-230, March.
    11. Xiao, Erte & Bicchieri, Cristina, 2010. "When equality trumps reciprocity," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 456-470, June.
    12. Zafar, Basit, 2011. "An experimental investigation of why individuals conform," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 55(6), pages 774-798, August.
    13. Emin Karagözoglu & Arno Riedl, 2010. "Information, Uncertainty, and Subjective Entitlements in Bargaining," CESifo Working Paper Series 3133, CESifo.
    14. Rustichini, Aldo & Villeval, Marie Claire, 2014. "Moral hypocrisy, power and social preferences," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 107(PA), pages 10-24.
    15. Brañas-Garza, Pablo & Cobo-Reyes, Ramón & Espinosa, María Paz & Jiménez, Natalia & Kovárík, Jaromír & Ponti, Giovanni, 2010. "Altruism and social integration," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 249-257, July.
    16. Sanders, Michael, 2017. "Social influences on charitable giving in the workplace," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 129-136.
    17. Ulrike Müller, 2012. "Pro-poor Service Delivery and Social Identity," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2012-055, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    18. Hanna Fromell & Daniele Nosenzo & Trudy Owens & Fabio Tufano, 2019. "Are Victims Truly Worse Off in the Presence of Bystanders? Revisiting the Bystander Effect," Revue économique, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 70(6), pages 927-943.
    19. Hannes Koppel & Günther G. Schulze, 2008. "Inefficient but effective? A field experiment on the effectiveness of direct and indirect transfer mechanisms," Discussion Paper Series 2, Department of International Economic Policy, University of Freiburg, revised Mar 2008.
    20. Anna Dreber & Tore Ellingsen & Magnus Johannesson & David Rand, 2013. "Do people care about social context? Framing effects in dictator games," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 16(3), pages 349-371, September.
    21. Colleen M. Boland & Corinna Ewelt-Knauer & Julia Schneider, 2022. "The gift that keeps on giving: corporate giving and excessive risk-taking," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 92(3), pages 355-396, April.
    22. Hannes Koppel & Günther G. Schulze, 2009. "On the Channels of Pro-Social Behavior Evidence from a natural field experiment," Jena Economics Research Papers 2009-102, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:kap:jcopol:v:41:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1007_s10603-018-9370-7. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.