Abstract This article uncovers the role of framing in the determination of negligence. Negligence disputes fall into two categories: cases in which injurers inflicted harm while seeking to avoid a loss to themselves (loss frame) and those in which they were seeking to obtain a personal gain (gain frame). We develop a theoretical framework whereby the frame of the injurer's behavior shapes negligence determinations in two ways. First, people are less likely to find an injurer negligent in a loss than in a gain frame. This is because, due to loss aversion, they find behavior more reasonable if done to avoid a loss than to obtain a gain. Second, people accord greater weight to the efficiency of the injurer's behavior in a loss frame than in a gain frame. This is because a comparison between the victim's harm and the injurer's benefit is more salient when both parties face a loss (loss frame). A series of experiments supported both hypotheses as well as the underlying mechanism. We discuss the implications of our findings and suggest that they may relate to the seemingly inconsistent case law on the role of efficiency considerations in negligence cases.
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 1 citations exist upstream.
Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.