ABSTRACT
The incorporation of behavioral economics and cognitive psychology has profoundly challenged traditional legal scholarship’s understanding of human decision making. This Article explores how insights from the behavioral sciences have fundamentally recast the academy’s approach to legal doctrine in the private law subjects that have long been the foundation of legal training. By demonstrating systematic cognitive biases and heuristics that deviate from rational choice theory, behavioral research has upended the rational choice assumption that anchored consequentialist analysis of law and left in its wake a more contingent and context-dependent, and thus a fragmented, normative landscape.
Russell Korobkin and Jeffrey J Rachlinski, Legal Analysis After the Behavioral Revolution, 75 DePaul Law Review (2026).
Leave a Reply