IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/empleg/v22y2025i3p270-297.html

The Distance Factor in Remedies

Author

Listed:
  • Daphna Lewinsohn‐Zamir
  • Ilana Ritov

Abstract

This article proposes a new classification of legal remedies that cuts across existing classifications. It argues that all remedies involving the transfer of resources are positioned along a continuum from close to remote, which determines their “distance factor.” The basic distinction is between remedies provided directly by the injurer to the injured and remedies that are provided through third parties. The article presents the results of two original, preregistered experiments designed to examine the effect of the distance factor on perceptions of, and preferences for, various remedies from the perspectives of both the injured and injurers. The experiments reveal that even when the remedy is monetary, both injured and injurers prefer the remedy with the smaller distance factor. Specifically, both parties believe that direct compensation leads to better outcomes than payment via a third party with regard to rectifying the harm done, granting satisfaction to the injured, treating the injured and injurer with respect, improving the bilateral relations, and increasing the injurer's sense of responsibility for the harm. These findings are relevant to the various goals that the law wishes to promote, such as corrective justice, economic efficiency, or distributive justice. They vindicate the importance of private law, offer a more attractive justification for it than the one offered by Civil Recourse Theory, and support pluralism in remedial modes.

Suggested Citation

  • Daphna Lewinsohn‐Zamir & Ilana Ritov, 2025. "The Distance Factor in Remedies," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(3), pages 270-297, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:empleg:v:22:y:2025:i:3:p:270-297
    DOI: 10.1111/jels.12414
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jels.12414
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jels.12414?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tom R. Tyler, 2004. "Enhancing Police Legitimacy," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 593(1), pages 84-99, May.
    2. Charlotte Jones & Donald W. Hine & Anthony D. G. Marks, 2017. "The Future is Now: Reducing Psychological Distance to Increase Public Engagement with Climate Change," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(2), pages 331-341, February.
    3. Broome,John, 1999. "Ethics out of Economics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521642750.
    4. Zamir, Eyal & Medina, Barak, 2010. "Law, Economics, and Morality," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195372168.
    5. McGraw, A Peter & Tetlock, Philip E & Kristel, Orie V, 2003. "The Limits of Fungibility: Relational Schemata and the Value of Things," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 30(2), pages 219-229, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Preston Greene, 2024. "Social bias, not time bias," Politics, Philosophy & Economics, , vol. 23(1), pages 100-121, February.
    2. Russell Belk, 2007. "Why Not Share Rather Than Own?," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 611(1), pages 126-140, May.
    3. Avital Mentovich & Guy Ben‐Porat & Natalie Levy & Phillip A. Goff & Tom Tyler, 2020. "Policing alienated minorities in divided cities," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(3), pages 531-550, July.
    4. Liang-Chu Ho & Yu-Hsien Sung & Chia-Chun Wu & Pei-Shan Lee & Wen-Bin Chiou, 2020. "Envisaging Mitigation Action Can Induce Lower Discounting toward Future Environmental Gains and Promote Pro-Environmental Behavior," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-12, November.
    5. Lucía Tiscornia, 2024. "Police reform in the aftermath of armed conflict: How militarization and accountability affect police violence," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 61(3), pages 383-397, May.
    6. Aurelien Portuese & Orla Gough & Joseph Tanega, 2017. "The principle of legal certainty as a principle of economic efficiency," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 44(1), pages 131-156, August.
    7. Jaynes, Chae M. & Lee, Jacqueline G. & Moule, Richard K., 2024. "Testing racial and ethnic differences in the correlates of court legitimacy," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    8. Schilizzi, Steven, 2000. "The economics of ethical behaviour and environmental management," 2000 Conference (44th), January 23-25, 2000, Sydney, Australia 123729, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    9. A. Peter McGraw & Eldar Shafir & Alexander Todorov, 2010. "Valuing Money and Things: Why a $20 Item Can Be Worth More and Less Than $20," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(5), pages 816-830, May.
    10. McCarthy, David & Mikkola, Kalle & Thomas, Teruji, 2016. "Utilitarianism with and without expected utility," MPRA Paper 72578, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Alan Shiell & Lisa Gold, 2003. "If the price is right: vagueness and values clarification in contingent valuation," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(11), pages 909-919, November.
    12. Olof Johansson-Stenman & James Konow, 2010. "Fair Air: Distributive Justice and Environmental Economics," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 46(2), pages 147-166, June.
    13. Kim, Do-hun & Sjølie, Hanne K. & Aguilar, Francisco X., 2024. "Psychological distances to climate change and public preferences for biodiversity-augmenting attributes in family-owned production forests," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    14. Ross A. Tippit, 2014. "Modeling exogenous moral norms," The Journal of Philosophical Economics, Bucharest Academy of Economic Studies, The Journal of Philosophical Economics, vol. 8(1), November.
    15. P. Marijn Poortvliet & Meredith T. Niles & Jeroen A. Veraart & Saskia E. Werners & Fiona C. Korporaal & Bob C. Mulder, 2020. "Communicating Climate Change Risk: A Content Analysis of IPCC’s Summary for Policymakers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-14, June.
    16. Crifasi, Cassandra K. & Williams, Rebecca G. & Booty, Marisa D. & Owens-Young, Jessica L. & Webster, Daniel W. & Buggs, Shani A.L., 2022. "Community perspectives on gun violence and safety: The role of policing in Baltimore City," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    17. Steffen Giessner & Niels Quaquebeke, 2010. "Using a Relational Models Perspective to Understand Normatively Appropriate Conduct in Ethical Leadership," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 95(1), pages 43-55, September.
    18. Trisha R. Shrum, 2021. "The salience of future impacts and the willingness to pay for climate change mitigation: an experiment in intergenerational framing," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 165(1), pages 1-20, March.
    19. Ingo Pies & Philipp Schreck & Karl Homann, 2021. "Single-objective versus multi-objective theories of the firm: using a constitutional perspective to resolve an old debate," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 779-811, April.
    20. Thomas J. Holt, 2018. "Regulating Cybercrime through Law Enforcement and Industry Mechanisms," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 679(1), pages 140-157, September.

    More about this item

    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:wly:empleg:v:22:y:2025:i:3:p:270-297. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1740-1461 .

    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.