The Impact of Damage Caps on Civil Litigation: Experimental and Field Analyses

当前关于诉讼改革的辩论中的一个主要问题是，是否限制原告在诉讼中可以追回的金额。大约有30个州现在采用了某种类型的“损害上限”，限制支付痛苦和痛苦、惩罚性损害赔偿和其他非经济损害赔偿。然而，很少有研究考察它们对诉讼过程的影响。本研究采用实验和现场分析相结合的方法，综合运用经济学、心理学和法学等学科，探讨损害赔偿上限对诉讼提起和解决的影响。在研究的第一阶段，我们进行了三个审前讨价还价实验，以探索损害上限影响和解前景的行为机制。初步证据表明，当损害上限相对较低时，就会增加和解的可能性。然而，非常高的损害赔偿上限实际上会降低原告获得和解的可能性，因为它为原告提供了一个向上的“焦点”。这意味着，在特定的州，上限雕像将提高大案件的结算率，并使小案件的结算率恶化。进一步的实验将探索这些发现相对于上限水平的敏感性，并允许描述潜在的定居行为过程。在研究的第二阶段，我们收集了大量关于在美国可操作的损害上限的现场数据，并估计它们对提出索赔和庭外和解的数量的影响。这项经验性工作大大扩展了以前进行的工作。首先，收集的数据涵盖的时间比以前研究的时间要长得多，它确定了最有效的上限类型。其次，我们的分析改进了以前的研究，比较了上限覆盖的案件(“治疗”组)和不包括上限的案件(“控制”组)在上限设置前和上限设置后的提交和解决情况。实验和实地方法的结合提供了对损害上限对诉讼程序的影响的更全面的了解。试验分析有助于了解承台引起的性态变化，考察其对沉降的影响，并探讨结果对承台水平的敏感性。现场数据分析补充了实验分析，估计了上限效应的大小，并确定了特别有影响的上限类型。这两项分析都将为关于损害上限的影响的辩论提供信息，并建议如何设计上限法规以符合政策目标。

A major issue in the current debate over litigation reform concerns whether to limit the amount a plaintiff can recover in a lawsuit. Approximately thirty states now employ some type of `damage cap` that limits payments for pain and suffering, punitive damages, and other non-economic damages. However, very little research has examined their effect on the litigation process. This research uses experimental and field analysis and draws on the disciplines of economics, psychology, and law to explore the effects that damage caps have on the filing and settlement of lawsuits. In the first stage of the research, we conduct three pre-trial bargaining experiments to explore the behavioral mechanisms by which damage caps affect the prospects for settlement. Preliminary evidence suggests that when the damage cap is relatively low, it increases the likelihood of settlement. However, a very high damage cap can actually reduce the prospects for settlement by providing plaintiffs with an upward `focal point`. This implies that in a particular state, a cap statue will improve settlement rates for big cases and worsen them for small cases. Further experimentation will explore the sensitivity of these findings with respect to the level of the cap and allow a description of the behavioral processes underlying settlement. In the second stage of the research we collect extensive field data on the damage caps that are operable in the U.S. and estimate their impact on the number of claims filed and settled out-of- court. This empirical work significantly expands on previous work that has been conducted. First, the data collected covers a substantially longer time period than has been previously studied and it identifies the types of caps that are most effective. Second, our analysis improves on previous research by comparing the pre- and post-cap filing and settlement of cases covered by the cap (the `treatment` group) to those not covered by the cap (the `control` group). The combination of experimental and field methodologies provide a more complete understanding of the impact of damage caps on the litigation process. The experimental analysis helps to understand the behavioral changes induced by a cap, examine their ensuing effect on settlement, and explore the sensitivity of the results to the level of the cap. The field data analysis complements the experimental analysis by estimating the magnitude of the effect of caps and identifying the types of caps that are particularly influential. Both analyses will inform the debate about the effect of damage caps and suggest how cap statutes can be designed to comport with policy goals.