The authors discuss a range of empirical tools from economics, marketing, and consumer behavior in the International Comparative Legal Guide to: Product Liability.
Samid Hussain, Vildan Altuglu, and Matteo Li Bergolis describe and discuss the strengths and weaknesses of empirical tools typically employed by plaintiffs and defendants in product liability matters. The chapter, “An Assessment of Analytical Tools in Product Liability Matters—Perspectives from Economics, Marketing, and Consumer Behaviour” was published in the International Comparative Legal Guide to: Product Liability.
The Comcast ruling in 2013 and U.S. case law since then has raised the bar for plaintiffs to establish a causal link between their theories of liability and actual harm. In product liability matters, plaintiffs typically claim that the defendant misrepresented the true characteristics of the products at issue, and therefore plaintiffs either overpaid for the products they purchased and/or the purchased products diminished in value following disclosures of the alleged misrepresentations.
The authors discuss some of the analytical methods used by experts on both sides in product liability matters, including:
- Surveys relating to consumer behaviour and purchase decisions
- Surveys relating to contested marketing communications
- Conjoint analyses
- Content analysis
- Regression methods
This chapter was originally published in the International Comparative Legal Guide to: Product Liability 2019 in May 2019.
The views expressed in this article are solely those of the authors, who are responsible for the content, and do not necessarily represent the views of Cornerstone Research.