Premium
Anchoring Legal Standards
Author(s) -
Feldman Yuval,
Schurr Amos,
Teichman Doron
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
journal of empirical legal studies
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.529
H-Index - 24
eISSN - 1740-1461
pISSN - 1740-1453
DOI - 10.1111/jels.12116
Subject(s) - stylized fact , interpretation (philosophy) , anchoring , empirical legal studies , scale (ratio) , empirical research , test (biology) , psychology , social psychology , law , legal research , political science , economics , epistemology , computer science , paleontology , philosophy , biology , macroeconomics , programming language , physics , quantum mechanics
This article presents the first empirical study on whether anchors influence the interpretation of vague legal standards. To test this question, the article presents a series of stylized experiments that measure and compare participants’ interpretation of a vague norm after they were exposed to anchors. Overall, the results suggest that the content of substantive legal rules might be altered by anchors. This effect is documented in numerous legal settings (e.g., torts, corporate, copyright) and across both expert (i.e., experienced lawyers) and nonexpert (i.e., students) populations. Furthermore, the effect is shown to exist both when participants express judgments on a numeric scale and when they make dichotomous judgments that are detached from that scale. Based on these findings, the article revisits several long‐standing legal debates and reevaluates their conclusions.