Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/85014
Authors: 
Engel, Christoph
Year of Publication: 
2012
Series/Report no.: 
Preprints of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2012/23
Abstract: 
If accurate prediction is the goal, and if information about the unconditional probability of the predicted event is available, a strong case can be made for using this information, i.e. for a Bayesian approach to inference. Not so rarely, the law calls for accurate prediction, e.g. if a bailing decision hinges on an estimate of recidivism risk. Yet for other questions of law, and for the law of evidence in particular, accuracy is not the exclusive goal. Substantive law determines who should bear the risk that doubt cannot be removed. These rules decide whether several individuals, or several acts for that matter, shall be treated as members of a class. Applying Bayes' rule also implicitly treats the person or the action in question as a member of a class. If in conflict, the normative decision of substantive law overrides Bayes' rule, and forces judges and administrators to neglect the base rate.
Subjects: 
base rate
Bayes' rule
acting in concert
product share liability
alternative causes
Document Type: 
Working Paper

Files in This Item:
File
Size
398.29 kB





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.