Experimental Simulations and Tort Reform: Avoidance, Error and Overreaching in Sunstein Et Al.'s Punitive Damages

45 Pages Posted: 10 Aug 2004

See all articles by Neil Vidmar

Neil Vidmar

Duke University - School of Law

Abstract

This article addresses tort reform claims made in Cass R. Sunstein, Reid Hastie, John W. Payne, David A. Schkade and W. Kip Viscusi in Punitive Damages: How Juries Decide and related articles, research that was largely underwritten by the Exxon Corporation. Based upon a series of simulation experiments, those authors have made a general claim that juries are incapable of making coherent judgments about punitive damages. In this article I raise serious methodological problems bearing on the validity of the research, and, therefore, its ability to provide judges and legislators with useful information about juries and punitive damages.

Keywords: punitive damages, tort reform, juries, simulation research

Suggested Citation

Vidmar, Neil, Experimental Simulations and Tort Reform: Avoidance, Error and Overreaching in Sunstein Et Al.'s Punitive Damages. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=574148

Neil Vidmar (Contact Author)

Duke University - School of Law ( email )

210 Science Drive
Box 90362
Durham, NC 27708
United States
919-613-7090 (Phone)
919-613-7231 (Fax)

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Downloads
209
Abstract Views
4,202
Rank
270,181
PlumX Metrics