Comments on: Bent Research http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2008/03/bent_research.html The Law, the Universe, and Everything Sun, 22 Nov 2009 15:33:39 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.3 hourly 1 By: dave hoffman http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2008/03/bent_research.html/comment-page-1#comment-49901 dave hoffman Mon, 17 Mar 2008 05:01:54 +0000 http://www.solove.org/archives/2008/03/bent-research.html#comment-49901 There is lots more on the Exxon front: Denise E. Antolini, Punitive Damages in Rhetoric and Reality: An Integrated Empirical Analysis of Punitive Damages in Hawaii, 1985-2001, 20 J.L. & POL. 143, 151-53 (2004); Theodore Eisenberg, Damage Awards in Perspective: Behind the Headline-Grabbing Awards in Exxon Valdez and Engle, 36 WAKE. FORR. L. REV.1129, 1147-49 (2002); Neil Vidmar, Juries Don't Make Legal Decisions! And Other Problems: A Critique of Hastie et al. on Punitive Damages, 23 LAW & HUM. BEHAV. 705, 713 (1999); Richard Lempert, Juries, Hindsight, and Punitive Damage Awards: Failures of a Social Science Case for Change, 48 DEPAUL L. REV. 867, 871 n.16 (1999) ("[I]t appears that Exxon is making a concerted effort to build a social science case for reducing or taking away the jury's discretion in awarding punitive damages and that the Hastie and Viscusi study is a part of this effort. ... Indeed, Exxon has recently cited the above research [about jury behavior] in its appeal of the $5.3 billion Exxon Valdez award."). There is lots more on the Exxon front: Denise E. Antolini, Punitive Damages in Rhetoric and Reality: An Integrated Empirical Analysis of Punitive Damages in Hawaii, 1985-2001, 20 J.L. & POL. 143, 151-53 (2004); Theodore Eisenberg, Damage Awards in Perspective: Behind the Headline-Grabbing Awards in Exxon Valdez and Engle, 36 WAKE. FORR. L. REV.1129, 1147-49 (2002); Neil Vidmar, Juries Don’t Make Legal Decisions! And Other Problems: A Critique of Hastie et al. on Punitive Damages, 23 LAW & HUM. BEHAV. 705, 713 (1999); Richard Lempert, Juries, Hindsight, and Punitive Damage Awards: Failures of a Social Science Case for Change, 48 DEPAUL L. REV. 867, 871 n.16 (1999) (”[I]t appears that Exxon is making a concerted effort to build a social science case for reducing or taking away the jury’s discretion in awarding punitive damages and that the Hastie and Viscusi study is a part of this effort. … Indeed, Exxon has recently cited the above research [about jury behavior] in its appeal of the $5.3 billion Exxon Valdez award.”).

]]> By: Patrick S. O'Donnell http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2008/03/bent_research.html/comment-page-1#comment-49900 Patrick S. O'Donnell Sun, 16 Mar 2008 23:35:07 +0000 http://www.solove.org/archives/2008/03/bent-research.html#comment-49900 Frank, I blogged about several recent titles having to do (more or less) with "bent science" at the Medical Humanities Blog in early February: http://www.medhumanities.org/2008/02/cancer-and-our.html#comments In a comment to the post I mention several other helpful books on topic and here I would add David B. Resnik's The Ethics of Science: An Introduction (1998) and Kristin Shrader-Frechette's Ethics of Scientific Reasearch (1994). Of course work in the fields of "social epistemology" and "science and technology studies" are likewise invaluable. Frank,

I blogged about several recent titles having to do (more or less) with “bent science” at the Medical Humanities Blog in early February: http://www.medhumanities.org/2008/02/cancer-and-our.html#comments

In a comment to the post I mention several other helpful books on topic and here I would add David B. Resnik’s The Ethics of Science: An Introduction (1998) and Kristin Shrader-Frechette’s Ethics of Scientific Reasearch (1994). Of course work in the fields of “social epistemology” and “science and technology studies” are likewise invaluable.

]]>