首页> 外文期刊>The Journal of Legal Studies >Loss Aversion, Omission Bias, and the Burden of Proof in Civil Litigation
【24h】

Loss Aversion, Omission Bias, and the Burden of Proof in Civil Litigation

机译:民事诉讼中的损失回避,遗漏偏见和举证责任

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

The general standard of proof in civil litigation is preponderance of the evidence. To prevail, the plaintiff must establish the case with a probability exceeding .5. We argue that since litigants tend to take the status quo as the reference point, dismissal of a claim is likely to be perceived as denying the plaintiff gains, and acceptance of a claim is likely to be perceived as inflicting losses on the defendant. Loss aversion thus justifies placing the burden of proof on the plaintiff. Notwithstanding the formal rule, our experimental findings suggest that the actual standard of proof in civil litigation is most likely higher than 51 percent. This phenomenon is plausibly due to fact finders' omission bias. To minimize the total costs of judicial errors, loss aversion calls for setting the standard of proof considerably higher than 51 percent. Conflicting considerations militate against this proposal, however.
机译:民事诉讼中举证的一般标准以举证为准。为了胜诉,原告必须以超过.5的概率立案。我们认为,由于诉讼人倾向于以现状为参考点,因此驳回索赔可能会被视为剥夺了原告的利益,而接受索赔可能会被视为对被告造成了损失。因此,避免损失赔偿有理由将举证责任放在原告身上。尽管有正式的规定,我们的实验结果表明,民事诉讼中的实际举证标准极有可能高于51%。这种现象很可能是由于事实发现者的遗漏偏见。为了最大程度地减少司法错误的总成本,对损失的规避要求将举证标准设定为大大高于51%。但是,相互矛盾的考虑不利于该提议。

著录项

  • 来源
    《The Journal of Legal Studies》 |2012年第1期|p.165-207|共43页
  • 作者

    Eyal Zamir; Ilana Ritov;

  • 作者单位

    Hebrew University of Jerusalem;

    School of Education and Center for Rationality at Hebrew University of Jerusalem;

  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

  • 入库时间 2022-08-18 02:37:34

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号