Michael Salinger, Apr 01, 2010
In both consumer protection and antitrust, the use of standard economic analysis has generally been to limit the scope of government intervention. The interest in behavioral economics (and some of the resistance to it) stems from the belief that it justifies intervention that conventional economic analysis suggests is unwarranted. Proponents see behavioral economics as the antidote to the Chicago School poison. Opponents see it as a mutated bacterium, resistant to the economic medicine that has led to improved policy. In this article, I will provide some background on behavioral economics and assess what insights it provides for consumer protection and antitrust policy.
Featured News
The Knot to Acquire Rival Zola Amid Growing Regulatory Scrutiny
Oct 14, 2026 by
CPI
Apple Seeks to Overturn Record $5.7 Billion Patent Verdict
Oct 14, 2026 by
CPI
Stripchat Loses EU Court Fight Over Digital Services Act Classification
Oct 14, 2026 by
CPI
Japan Antitrust Regulator Plans $3.3 Million in Penalties Over Railway Bid-Rigging
Oct 14, 2026 by
CPI
Liquidia, United Therapeutics Reach $381 Million Deal to End Lung Drug Litigation
Oct 14, 2026 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – National Security
Sep 22, 2026 by
CPI
National Security in U.S. Antitrust Enforcement: Toward a More Disciplined Framework
Sep 22, 2026 by
Rod Rosenstein & Timothy Finley
The Department of War’s M&A Review Guidance: What Companies in the Defense Industry Need to Know
Sep 22, 2026 by
Eric Stocking & Paul Ney
National Security, Resilience and the Boundaries of Merger Control
Sep 22, 2026 by
Beatriz Marques
National Security and Competition: Building Resilient Telecommunications Networks
Sep 22, 2026 by
Roslyn Layton