Stampede to Judgment: Persuasive Influence and Herding Behavior by Courts
We model appeals courts as Bayesian decision makers with private information about a supreme court's interpretation of the law; each court also observes the previous decisions of other appeals courts in similar cases. Such "persuasive influence" can cause "herding" behavior by later appeals courts as decisions progressively rely more on previous decisions and less on a court's private information. We provide an example drawn from a recent United States Supreme Court decision finding unconstitutional a basic provision of a law previously found constitutional by six circuit courts. Herding on the wrong decision may remain uncorrected, since review of harmonious decisions is rare. Copyright 1999 by Oxford University Press.
To our knowledge, this item is not available for
download. To find whether it is available, there are three
1. Check below under "Related research" 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.
Volume (Year): 1 (1999)
Issue (Month): 1-2 (Fall)
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Fax: 01865 267 985
Web page: http://www.aler.oupjournals.org/Email:
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.oup.co.uk/journals|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:amlawe:v:1:y:1999:i:1-2:p:158-89. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Oxford University Press)or (Christopher F. Baum)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.