The Effects of Reference Dependence on Judicial Persuasion

ABSTRACT I study a model of persuasion in which a loss‐averse judge has reference‐dependent preferences. When the loss from wrongful conviction looms largest, the outcome that forms the judge's reference point has significant implications for the effectiveness of persuasion. When acquitting the innocent or the guilty is the reference point, an increase in the judge's loss aversion decreases the prosecutor's gain from persuasion. On the other hand, when convicting the guilty is the reference point, this gain increases as the judge becomes more loss‐averse. With a reference‐dependent jury, the interplay between the reference point and the complementarity of the jurors' actions offers a novel theoretical explanation for the differing behavior of judges and juries.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Public Economic Theory
Published
2025-09-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/jpet.70059
Primary Topic
Law, Economics, and Judicial Systems
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Effects of Reference Dependence on Judicial Persuasion

Matthew J. Robertson
Journal of Public Economic Theory
Law, Economics, and Judicial Systems
article

The Effects of Reference Dependence on Judicial Persuasion

Matthew J. Robertson
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT I study a model of persuasion in which a loss‐averse judge has reference‐dependent preferences. When the loss from wrongful conviction looms largest, the outcome that forms the judge's reference point has significant implications for the effectiveness of persuasion. When acquitting the innocent or the guilty is the reference point, an increase in the judge's loss aversion decreases the prosecutor's gain from persuasion. On the other hand, when convicting the guilty is the reference point, this gain increases as the judge becomes more loss‐averse. With a reference‐dependent jury, the interplay between the reference point and the complementarity of the jurors' actions offers a novel theoretical explanation for the differing behavior of judges and juries.

Journal of Public Economic TheoryVol. 27(5)
London South Bank University (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 68%
Law, Economics, and Judicial Systems
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.