Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=991335
 
 

References (52)



 
 

Citations (3)



 


 



Should Legal Empiricists Go Bayesian?


Jeff Strnad


Stanford Law School

May 2007

Stanford Law and Economics Olin Working Paper No. 342

Abstract:     
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

working papers series





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: 1,181
Downloads: 324
Download Rank: 54,227
References:  52
Citations:  3

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo5 in 0.453 seconds