The Legal Implications of Psychology: Human Behavior, Behavioral Economics, and the Law Symposium: The Legal Implications of Psychology Human Behavior, Behavioral Economics, and the Law

Nearly all interesting legal issues require accurate predictions about human behavior to be resolved satisfactorily. Judges, policy- makers, and academics invoke mental models of individual and social behavior whenever they estimate the desirability of alternative rules, policies, or procedures. Con...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:  
Bibliographische Detailangaben
1. VerfasserIn: Hurd, Stephen D. (VerfasserIn)
Medienart: Elektronisch Buch
Sprache:Englisch
Veröffentlicht: 1998
In:Jahr: 1998
Online-Zugang: Volltext (kostenfrei)
Verfügbarkeit prüfen: HBZ Gateway

MARC

LEADER 00000cam a22000002c 4500
001 1866122347
003 DE-627
005 20250126054905.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 231018s1998 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
035 |a (DE-627)1866122347 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1866122347 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 2,1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Hurd, Stephen D.  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
245 1 4 |a The Legal Implications of Psychology: Human Behavior, Behavioral Economics, and the Law Symposium: The Legal Implications of Psychology Human Behavior, Behavioral Economics, and the Law 
264 1 |c 1998 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a Nearly all interesting legal issues require accurate predictions about human behavior to be resolved satisfactorily. Judges, policy- makers, and academics invoke mental models of individual and social behavior whenever they estimate the desirability of alternative rules, policies, or procedures. Contemporary legal scholarship has come to recognize that if these predictions are naive and intuitive, without any strong empirical grounding, they are susceptible to error and ideological bias. Something more rigorous is thus expected when normative claims are advanced, and the place of the social sciences has expanded in legal discourse to satisfy this expectation.' Three branches of the social sciences-economics, psychology, and sociology-offer the most obvious assistance in predicting every- day human behavior, and each has a well-recognized history of influence on legal scholarship. The legal realists-most notably, Jerome Frank--took psychology quite seriously half a century ago; sociological jurisprudence came to prominence shortly thereafter, and law and society studies are still highly visible. But as many have said so often, both psychology and sociology have suffered from the inability to generate a unified behavioral model rivaling the simplicity, elegance, and testability of the economist's utility- maximizing rational actor. For this reason (and probably a host of others), the rational actor model came to dominate predictions about how normal persons and groups respond to legal incentives. By the late 1970s and early 1980s, law and economics was the one social science-based approach to have a truly pervasive effect on legal thinking. Law and psychology for some time was largely the study of either marginal segments of the population, such as the criminally insane, or specialized procedural subjects like jury behavior and eyewitness recall 
856 4 0 |u https://core.ac.uk/download/287297794.pdf  |x Verlag  |z kostenfrei  |3 Volltext 
935 |a mkri 
951 |a BO 
ELC |a 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 4391803100 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1866122347 
LOK |0 005 20231018043632 
LOK |0 008 231018||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 035   |a (DE-2619)CORE77942845 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-2619  |c DE-627  |d DE-2619 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-2619 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 935   |a core 
OAS |a 1 
ORI |a SA-MARC-krimdoka001.raw