Journal of Forensic Economics Volume 21: Issue 1

Select Issue

Editor's Note

Since January 2009, the Journal of Forensic Economics (JFE) has been operating under a new administrative structure in which I have been joined as co-Executive Editor by Jim Ciecka and Kurt Krueger is now Managing Editor. Jim and I are responsible for editorial decisions concerning what is and is not published in each issue. Jim brings an extensive publication record in peer reviewed journals that includes research on worklife expectancy that is well known in the forensic economics community.

Jim and I are also happy that Kurt, who already has an extensive record of service to NAFE, has

Download PDF

Michael J. Piette, 1946–2009

DOI: 10.5085/0898-5510-21.1.3

Ride with Grand Daughter Emily

Download as Powerpoint
Download Figure

Michael Piette died in a single-engine aircraft incident at the Tallahassee Regional Airport in the early evening of November 4, 2009.

Mike was our friend and colleague. Mike's humanity, professionalism and integrity were evident in every interaction he had over his entire professional career, and no doubt his entire life.

On paper Mike was quite a guy. He was a husband, a father, a grandfather. He had been a banker. He had been a professor. He was an accomplished consultant and expert witness. He was rightfully proud of his presentations

Download PDF

ARTICLES

A 2009 Survey of Forensic Economists: Their Methods, Estimates, and Perspectives

, and

DOI: 10.5085/0898-5510-21.1.5

I. Background

As part of an ongoing longitudinal research effort, the authors conducted an electronic survey of National Association of Forensic Economics (NAFE) members in January and February 2009. The topics covered were similar to those investigated in earlier surveys such as the value of certain key economic variables, as well as open-ended questions involving ethical practices in the forensic consulting business. This survey also included a significant number of new questions, which will be noted later in the paper.

The 2009 survey was conducted electronically based upon the authors' experience with the 2006 survey. That survey was the first

Download PDF

Self-Consumption in Wrongful Death Cases: Decedent or Family Income?

and

DOI: 10.5085/0898-5510-21.1.35

I. Introduction

In most states, it is necessary to deduct self-consumption of the deceased when estimating lost earning capacity from wrongful death. The impact whether this deduction is taken only from deceased earnings or from total family income can be substantial. As an example, assume that the now deceased wife earned $30,000 while the surviving husband earned $100,000. For simplicity, assume that self-consumption is 30% of earnings regardless of the level of earnings. Self-consumption based upon the decedent's income is $9,000 and the loss would be $21,000. However, self-consumption based upon family income is .3(30,000 + 100,000) = $39,000 and

Download PDF

A Closer Look at Correction for False Discovery Bias When Making Multiple Comparisons

DOI: 10.5085/0898-5510-21.1.55

I. Introduction

A recent article in this journal by Tabak (2006) highlighted a potentially serious source of bias that can arise when multiple statistical tests of a damages theory are performed and even one test rejecting the null hypothesis is regarded as supporting the damages theory. Repeated testing will eventually produce a “false discovery,” that is, rejection of the null hypothesis in favor of the alternative hypothesis when the null hypothesis is true, which statisticians refer to as type I error. Consequently, performing multiple tests without adjusting the critical value can be problematical because it can lead to

Download PDF

Present Value Functions and Recursions

and

DOI: 10.5085/0898-5510-21.1.63

I. Introduction

Using a Markov-induced decomposition of time in the labor force, we compute means, standard deviations, and other distributional characteristics of the present value of years of labor force activity. We also provide bootstrap estimates of the mean present value and the corresponding standard deviations of sample means. This paper combines years of future labor force activity, decomposed with a Markov process, with discounting that activity to the present, whereas previous literature has analyzed only undiscounted years of activity.

A worker at exact age x, given activity status, sex and education, receives $1 for each future year

Download PDF

COMMENTS & NOTES

Comment: “A Closer Look at Correction for False Discovery Bias When Making Multiple Comparisons”

DOI: 10.5085/0898-5510-21.1.99

The John D. Finnerty paper in this issue discusses the advantages and explains the usage of the Benjamini-Hochberg (BH) correction for the error-rate, in instances of multiple tests conducted in a statistical analysis. The paper recommends the BH procedure over the Bonferroni or Šidák correction. Bonferroni and Šidák are considered more “conservative.” In other words, Bonferroni and Šidák set a higher threshold for a plaintiff's statistical test to overcome. The Šidák adjustment procedure was proposed by David I. Tabak in an earlier volume of this Journal (Tabak, 2006).

There are two issues of relevance raised originally

Download PDF

Comment: “A Closer Look at Correction for False Discovery Bias When Making Multiple Comparisons”

DOI: 10.5085/0898-5510-21.1.105

“A Closer Look at Correcting for False Discovery Bias When Making Multiple Comparisons,” by John D. Finnerty in this issue provides an interesting response to my earlier article in this Journal 2006. While Finnerty presents strong views, unfortunately, it provides no basis to accept those views, which, in my opinion, run counter to statistical theory.

I begin with a brief statement of the primary difference in the views propounded by Finnerty (2009) and Tabak (2006), working off of the definition of multiple comparisons in the Reference Guide on Statistics.1

multiple comparison.

Download PDF

Two Definitional Issues with the Patton-Nelson Personal Consumption Tables: A Reply

, and

DOI: 10.5085/0898-5510-21.1.109

Introduction

In the preceding issue of this Journal 2007, Kurt Krueger commented on two definitional issues related to the use of the “Patton-Nelson Personal Consumption Tables 2005–06,” (PNPC) (2007) that were included in that same issue. Krueger states “This comment discusses two definitional issues with the PNPC estimates that readers should be aware of before applying them to a wrongful death case.” (p. 251)

This reply attempts to clarify Krueger's definitional issues so that users of the PNPC get a full view of the impact of his comments on the application of the PNPC.

The Issue of Family

Download PDF

Two Definitional Issues with the Patton-Nelson Personal Consumption Tables: A Reply to Ruble, Patton and Nelson

DOI: 10.5085/0898-5510-21.1.113

This issue includes a reply by Michael R. Ruble, Robert T. Patton and David M. Nelson (RPN) to my comment1 on their article “Patton-Nelson Personal Consumption Tables 2005–06” (PNPC) (2007). While RPN acknowledge their consumption methodology is framed by household size and income level alone, they do not address the implications of such homogeneity in those categories. Instead, RPN spend most of their reply presenting empirical information regarding the composition of households in response to my example of the personal consumption data relevant for husband and wife families.

1. Reply

By definition, the PNPC tables do not provide

Download PDF

Editor's Note

Michael J. Piette, 1946–2009

A 2009 Survey of Forensic Economists: Their Methods, Estimates, and Perspectives

I. Background

Self-Consumption in Wrongful Death Cases: Decedent or Family Income?

I. Introduction

A Closer Look at Correction for False Discovery Bias When Making Multiple Comparisons

I. Introduction

Present Value Functions and Recursions

I. Introduction

Comment: “A Closer Look at Correction for False Discovery Bias When Making Multiple Comparisons”

Comment: “A Closer Look at Correction for False Discovery Bias When Making Multiple Comparisons”

Two Definitional Issues with the Patton-Nelson Personal Consumption Tables: A Reply

Introduction

The Issue of Family

Two Definitional Issues with the Patton-Nelson Personal Consumption Tables: A Reply to Ruble, Patton and Nelson

1. Reply

Mothers’ Worklives and Marital Status

Personal Consumption and Single Persons: An Update

A Closer Look at Race, Ethnicity, and Gender Neutral Models

Life-Cycle Estimates of Earnings Growth by Education and Gender

Assessing Economic Damages in Personal Injury and Wrongful Death Litigation: The State of Montana