The Trial Selection Hypothesis without the 50 Percent Rule: Some Experimental Evidence

Robert E Thomas

The Journal of Legal Studies, 1995, vol. 24, issue 1, 209-28

Abstract: The selection hypothesis, known for its conclusion that plaintiffs win 50 percent of trials, posits that (1) trials are disproportionately selected from disputes close to the decision standard (the selection effect), (2) the range of disputes that go to trial decreases in the precision of attorney estimates of defendant fault, and (3) attorney estimates are essentially perfect. This article uses experimental methods to examine implications of the selection hypothesis. The results provide support for a selection effect, but there is no evidence of a relation between trial disputes and estimation precision. Instead, the difference between the two sides' estimates as well as the closeness of the dispute are the most significant determinants of dispute disposition. These results suggest that if attorneys estimate fault imperfectly, trials occur when attorneys draw extreme values from the distributions of their estimates. If systematic biases exist, then plaintiff win rates vary with the dispute type. Copyright 1995 by the University of Chicago.

Date: 1995
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (6)

Downloads: (external link)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/467958 (application/pdf)
Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:ucp:jlstud:v:24:y:1995:i:1:p:209-28

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in The Journal of Legal Studies from University of Chicago Press
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Journals Division ().