References (52)


Citations (2)



Should Legal Empiricists Go Bayesian?

Jeff Strnad

Stanford Law School

May 2007

Stanford Law and Economics Olin Working Paper No. 342

Bayesian empirical approaches appear frequently in fields such as engineering, computer science, political science and medicine, but almost never in law. This article illustrates how such approaches might be very useful in empirical legal studies. In particular, Bayesian approaches enable a much more natural connection between the normative or positive issues that typically motivate such studies and the empirical results.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 111

Keywords: Bayesian analysis, right-to-carry, Bayesian model averaging, model, comparison, model selection, model specification, hypothesis testing, BIC, prior elicitation, prior sensitivity, conditional maximum, likelihood criterion, CML, maximum marginal likelihood criterion, MML, g-prior, natural conjugate

JEL Classification: C10, C11, C12, C15, C23, C52, K14

Open PDF in Browser Download This Paper

Date posted: June 5, 2007  

Suggested Citation

Strnad, Jeff, Should Legal Empiricists Go Bayesian? (May 2007). Stanford Law and Economics Olin Working Paper No. 342. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=991335 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.991335

Contact Information

James (Jeff) Frank Strnad (Contact Author)
Stanford Law School ( email )
559 Nathan Abbott Way
Stanford, CA 94305-8610
United States
650-723-9674 (Phone)
Feedback to SSRN

Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 1,306
Downloads: 345
Download Rank: 57,210
References:  52
Citations:  2

© 2015 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo7 in 0.343 seconds