This chapter introduces a regulatory validity test for behavioural studies to be implemented into legal contexts using the example of European Union consumer law. It takes seriously criticism regarding a lack of legal knowledge and lack of involvement of legal expertise into behavioural policy-making and provides a solution for how to implement them. When assessing the quality of behavioural studies, in this context meaning the ‘fit for purpose’ to guide law-making and interpretation, the ‘regulatory validity’ test will ascertain that such studies can be used as indicators to support legal argumentation.
Kai Purnhagen and Niels Petersen
If legal scholarship is lagging behind other disciplines in using more objective evaluation standards for assessing the quality of legal research, Germany is definitely not at the forefront of closing the gap. Skepticism towards seemingly more objective assessment methods is more widely shared than in other European countries. There is no state-sponsored performance evaluation exercise of law schools on the federal level; peer-review of manuscripts for the acceptance in journals or monograph series is rare; and the use of journal rankings, citation analysis or other bibliometric tools is almost non-existent. Doctoral and postdoctoral (habilitation) theses are usually evaluated inside the faculty without external review. The quality standards that do exist mostly refer to the substantive evaluation of individual pieces of scholarship. However, they are rather vague and subject to diverging interpretations.