Thursday, May 22, 2014

Upside-down science

Funny cartoon that illustrates a paper I wrote:

A Theory of Competitive Framing

Luke Froeb 

Vanderbilt University - Strategy and Business Economics

Bernhard Ganglmair 

University of Texas at Dallas - School of Management - Department of Finance & Managerial Economics

Steven Tschantz 

Vanderbilt University - Department of Mathematics

March 24, 2014

Vanderbilt Owen Graduate School of Management Research Paper No. 2371768
Vanderbilt Law and Economics Research Paper No. 14-13 

In adversarial contests, we observe seemingly inconsistent claims about factual or scientific evidence. In this paper, we build a model that can explain the existence and effects of such claims. To do this, we turn scientific inquiry upside down. Instead of objective truth seekers who formulate hypotheses and then gather evidence to test them, we model behavior by self-interested parties who strategically choose hypotheses to influence a decision maker – after the evidence has already been produced and discovered. We show that equilibrium decisions are biased away from the best explanation, and the bias favors the party making the more extreme claim.

Keywords: framing, evidence-based decision making, adversarial justice, Bayesian hypothesis testing, litigation games, expert testimony

JEL Classification: C11, C72, D72, K41, L22

1 comment:

  1. There is nothing upside about science, it’s pretty much common sense just in advance way. I believe we should never be too much concerned over these stuff. I am working in Forex where science makes big difference and to help me out I am working with OctaFX broker, it is easily the biggest brokerage house in the world today and they have got all top benefits that one needs especially with my favorite option of swap free account available to be used.