IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jinsec/v16y2020i3p251-269_1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The impact of experience on how we perceive the rule of law

Author

Listed:
  • Arruñada, Benito

Abstract

Experience is a major source of knowledge. Could institutions be improved by eliciting the additional knowledge held by experienced individuals? I show here that in several areas of the law experienced individuals are more critical of institutional quality than inexperienced individuals. Moreover, performance indexes built with experienced subsamples substantially alter country rankings. Assuming no unmeasured confounders, more knowledge arguably leads experienced individuals to revise the more benign view held by the general population, composed mostly of inexperienced individuals. Moreover, experience is a stronger driver than alternative sources of knowledge, including education, which might therefore be reinforcing milder and, arguably, incorrect assessments of institutional quality. After observing how this ‘experience effect’ varies systematically across countries, I conclude by proposing that evaluations of institutional quality pay greater attention to experienced individuals and cautioning against basing inferences on assessments made by the general population.

Suggested Citation

  • Arruñada, Benito, 2020. "The impact of experience on how we perceive the rule of law," Journal of Institutional Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(3), pages 251-269, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:jinsec:v:16:y:2020:i:3:p:251-269_1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1744137419000778/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Arrunada, Benito, 2007. "Pitfalls to avoid when measuring institutions: Is Doing Business damaging business?," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 729-747, December.
    2. Razafindrakoto, Mireille & Roubaud, François, 2010. "Are International Databases on Corruption Reliable? A Comparison of Expert Opinion Surveys and Household Surveys in Sub-Saharan Africa," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 1057-1069, August.
    3. Patricia Funk, 2016. "How Accurate Are Surveyed Preferences for Public Policies? Evidence from a Unique Institutional Setup," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 98(3), pages 442-454, July.
    4. Andrei Shleifer & Florencio Lopez-de-Silanes & Rafael La Porta, 2008. "The Economic Consequences of Legal Origins," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 46(2), pages 285-332, June.
    5. Jisu Yoon & Stephan Klasen, 2018. "An Application of Partial Least Squares to the Construction of the Social Institutions and Gender Index (SIGI) and the Corruption Perception Index (CPI)," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 138(1), pages 61-88, July.
    6. Edward L. Glaeser & Rafael La Porta & Florencio Lopez-de-Silanes & Andrei Shleifer, 2004. "Do Institutions Cause Growth?," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 9(3), pages 271-303, September.
    7. Weber Abramo, Claudio, 2008. "How Much Do Perceptions of Corruption Really Tell Us?," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 2, pages 1-56.
    8. Raj Chetty & Adam Looney & Kory Kroft, 2009. "Salience and Taxation: Theory and Evidence," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(4), pages 1145-1177, September.
    9. Voigt, Stefan, 2013. "How (not) to measure institutions: a reply to Robinson and Shirley," Journal of Institutional Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(1), pages 35-37, March.
    10. Olken, Benjamin A., 2009. "Corruption perceptions vs. corruption reality," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(7-8), pages 950-964, August.
    11. Stefano Iacus & Gary King & Giuseppe Porro, 2008. "Matching for Causal Inference Without Balance Checking," UNIMI - Research Papers in Economics, Business, and Statistics unimi-1073, Universitá degli Studi di Milano.
    12. Voigt, Stefan & Gutmann, Jerg & Feld, Lars P., 2015. "Economic growth and judicial independence, a dozen years on: Cross-country evidence using an updated Set of indicators," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 197-211.
    13. Richard Rose & William Mishler, 2010. "Experience versus perception of corruption: Russia as a test case," Global Crime, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(2), pages 145-163, April.
    14. Voigt, Stefan, 2013. "How (Not) to measure institutions," Journal of Institutional Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(1), pages 1-26, March.
    15. Kaufmann, Daniel & Kraay, Aart & Mastruzzi, Massimo, 2010. "The worldwide governance indicators : methodology and analytical issues," Policy Research Working Paper Series 5430, The World Bank.
    16. Charles P. Oman & Christiane Arndt, 2006. "Governance Indicators for Development," OECD Development Centre Policy Insights 33, OECD Publishing.
    17. Treisman, Daniel, 2000. "The causes of corruption: a cross-national study," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(3), pages 399-457, June.
    18. repec:dau:papers:123456789/4352 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Gutmann, Jerg & Padovano, Fabio & Voigt, Stefan, 2020. "Perception vs. experience: Explaining differences in corruption measures using microdata," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    2. ROUGIER Eric, 2015. ""The parts and the whole”: Unbundling and re-bundling institutional systems and their effect on economic development," Cahiers du GREThA (2007-2019) 2015-12, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée (GREThA).
    3. Niclas Berggren & Jerg Gutmann, 2020. "Securing personal freedom through institutions: the role of electoral democracy and judicial independence," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 49(2), pages 165-186, April.
    4. Kyriacou, Andreas P., 2016. "Individualism–collectivism, governance and economic development," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 91-104.
    5. Christian Bjørnskov, 2015. "Constitutional property rights protection and economic growth: evidence from the post-communist transition," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 26(3), pages 247-280, September.
    6. Gutmann, Jerg & Voigt, Stefan, 2018. "The rule of law: Measurement and deep roots," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 68-82.
    7. Ezcurra, Roberto & Zuazu, Izaskun, 2019. "Political equality and quality of government," MPRA Paper 96476, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Razafindrakoto, Mireille & Roubaud, François, 2010. "Are International Databases on Corruption Reliable? A Comparison of Expert Opinion Surveys and Household Surveys in Sub-Saharan Africa," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 1057-1069, August.
    9. Daniel Oto Peralías & Daniel Oto-Peralías & Diego Romero-Ávila, 2012. "Tracing the Link between Government Size and Growth: The Role of Public Sector Quality," EcoMod2012 4015, EcoMod.
    10. Jacek Lewkowicz & Katarzyna Metelska-Szaniawska, 2016. "De jure and de facto institutions – disentangling the interrelationships," Working Papers 2016-29, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw.
    11. Qu, Guangjun & Slagter, Bob & Sylwester, Kevin & Doiron, Kyle, 2019. "Explaining the standard errors of corruption perception indices," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(4), pages 907-920.
    12. Zakharov, Nikita, 2019. "Does corruption hinder investment? Evidence from Russian regions," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 39-61.
    13. Christopher A. Hartwell, 2017. "Understanding “Development”: Insights from Some Aspects of Complexity Theory," Homo Oeconomicus: Journal of Behavioral and Institutional Economics, Springer, vol. 34(2), pages 165-190, November.
    14. Jacek LEWKOWICZ & Katarzyna METELSKA-SZANIAWSKA, 2021. "De Jure and De Facto Institutions: Implications for Law and for Economics," Ekonomista, Polskie Towarzystwo Ekonomiczne, issue 6, pages 758-776.
    15. Mircea Epure & Victor Martin-Sanchez & Sebastian Aparicio & David Urbano, 2023. "Human capital, institutions, and ambitious entrepreneurship during good times and two crises," Economics Working Papers 1875, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    16. Kaufmann, Daniel & Kraay, Aart & Mastruzzi, Massimo, 2007. "The worldwide governance indicators project : answering the critics," Policy Research Working Paper Series 4149, The World Bank.
    17. Boschma, Ron & Capone, Gianluca, 2015. "Institutions and diversification: Related versus unrelated diversification in a varieties of capitalism framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(10), pages 1902-1914.
    18. Michael Breen & Robert Gillanders, 2012. "Corruption, institutions and regulation," Economics of Governance, Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 263-285, September.
    19. Yan Leung Cheung & P. Raghavendra Rau & Aris Stouraitis, 2012. "How much do firms pay as bribes and what benefits do they get? Evidence from corruption cases worldwide," NBER Working Papers 17981, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Mohammad Amin & Priya Ranjan, 2008. "When Does Legal Origin Matter?," Working Papers 080912, University of California-Irvine, Department of Economics.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D02 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Institutions: Design, Formation, Operations, and Impact
    • D71 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Social Choice; Clubs; Committees; Associations
    • D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search; Learning; Information and Knowledge; Communication; Belief; Unawareness
    • K12 - Law and Economics - - Basic Areas of Law - - - Contract Law
    • K14 - Law and Economics - - Basic Areas of Law - - - Criminal Law
    • K31 - Law and Economics - - Other Substantive Areas of Law - - - Labor Law
    • K32 - Law and Economics - - Other Substantive Areas of Law - - - Energy, Environmental, Health, and Safety Law
    • K41 - Law and Economics - - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior - - - Litigation Process
    • K42 - Law and Economics - - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior - - - Illegal Behavior and the Enforcement of Law

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:jinsec:v:16:y:2020:i:3:p:251-269_1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/joi .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.