The Optimal Amount of Falsified Testimony
CIRPEE Working Paper No. 05-20; University of Bern Economics Discussion Paper No. 05-06
24 Pages Posted: 20 Jun 2005
Date Written: June 2005
Abstract
An arbiter can decide a case on the basis of his priors or he can ask for further evidence from the two parties to the conflict. The parties may misrepresent evidence in their favor at a cost. The arbiter is concerned about accuracy and low procedural costs. When both parties testify, each of them distorts the evidence less than when they testify alone. When the fixed cost of testifying is low, the arbiter hears both, for intermediate values one, and for high values no party at all. The ability to commit to an adjudication scheme makes it more likely that the arbiter requires evidence.
Keywords: Evidence production, procedure, costly state falsification, adversarial, inquisitorial
JEL Classification: D82, K41, K42
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Here is the Coronavirus
related research on SSRN
Recommended Papers
-
On the Economics of Trials: Adversarial Process, Evidence and Equilibrium Bias
-
Accuracy in the Assessment of Damages
By Louis Kaplow and Steven Shavell
-
A Theory of Legal Presumptions
By Antonio E. Bernardo, Eric L. Talley, ...
-
A Theory of Legal Presumptions
By Antonio E. Bernardo, Eric L. Talley, ...
-
The Burden of Proof in Civil Litigation: A Simple Model of Mechanism Design
-
Scale Economies and Synergies in Horizontal Merger Analysis
By Joseph Farrell and Carl Shapiro
-
Enforcement by Hearing: An Integrated Model of Evidence Production
-
Evidence Production in Adversarial vs. Inquisitorial Regimes
By Luke M. Froeb and Bruce H. Kobayashi
