TY - JOUR
T1 - Horseshoes, hand grenades, and regulatory enforcement
T2 - Close experience with potential sanctions and fraud deterrence
AU - Douthit, Jeremy
AU - Millar, Melanie
AU - White, Roger M.
N1 - Funding Information: For helpful feedback that improved this draft, we thank the three anonymous reviewers, Kareem Haggag, Max Hewitt, Ian Larkin (editor), Steve Kaplan, Tamar Kugler, Michael Majerczyk, Sonal Sahel (Assistant General Counsel, New York City Taxi and Limousine Commission), Jagadeesh Sivadasan (discussant), and participants at the 2018 Conference on Empirical Legal Studies. This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors. Authors are listed by last name. Each author contributed equally to this study. None. Publisher Copyright: © 2019 Elsevier Inc.
PY - 2021/9
Y1 - 2021/9
N2 - We investigate the deterrence effect of experience with regulatory enforcement on fraud in a unique natural setting. Using ride-level data on New York City taxicab drivers, we identify drivers who fraudulently overcharge customers and pair them with the outcomes of drivers’ experience with regulatory enforcement (taxi court). We examine whether drivers’ experience with the taxi court, specifically whether the taxi court found them guilty or not guilty of fraud, affects their subsequent fraud. Interestingly, we find that the effect of experience with the regulatory enforcement on the likelihood of future fraud depends on the verdict received. Consistent with an impact bias in drivers’ affective forecasting, drivers who are found guilty (not guilty) are more (less) likely to commit fraud than similar drivers without recent taxi court experience. Our results have implications for academics and policymakers by showing that sometimes the threat of enforcement can be more effective at deterring future fraud than the actual enforcement itself.
AB - We investigate the deterrence effect of experience with regulatory enforcement on fraud in a unique natural setting. Using ride-level data on New York City taxicab drivers, we identify drivers who fraudulently overcharge customers and pair them with the outcomes of drivers’ experience with regulatory enforcement (taxi court). We examine whether drivers’ experience with the taxi court, specifically whether the taxi court found them guilty or not guilty of fraud, affects their subsequent fraud. Interestingly, we find that the effect of experience with the regulatory enforcement on the likelihood of future fraud depends on the verdict received. Consistent with an impact bias in drivers’ affective forecasting, drivers who are found guilty (not guilty) are more (less) likely to commit fraud than similar drivers without recent taxi court experience. Our results have implications for academics and policymakers by showing that sometimes the threat of enforcement can be more effective at deterring future fraud than the actual enforcement itself.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85072580164&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85072580164&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.obhdp.2019.09.001
DO - 10.1016/j.obhdp.2019.09.001
M3 - Article
SN - 0749-5978
VL - 166
SP - 137
EP - 148
JO - Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes
JF - Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes
ER -