Faculty Profile

Molly Walker Wilson, Assistant Professor of Law

Resumé
• Assistant Professor of Law, Saint Louis University
• Summer Associate, 2003, Cozen O’Connor, Philadelphia
• Seminar Conductor, 1997-2001, University of Virginia
• Wesleyan University, B.A. (Psychology and English), May 1995
• University of Virginia School of Arts and Sciences, Masters in Psychology (Law), May 2001, Ph.D. in Psychology (Law), January 2004
• University of Virginia School of Law, J.D., May 2004

Personal Reflections
The most exciting thing to me about being a member of the faculty is the opportunity it affords me to research, write and teach about the intersection of law and social science.

The past 10 years have seen a tremendous surge in the number of scholarly law articles incorporating behavioral findings and psychological theory. As many have argued, creating laws that incentivize socially desirable behavior requires an understanding of how human beings relate to one another, process information and make decisions.

One area of legal scholarship that has become particularly relevant to this end is Behavioral Law and Economics (BLE). BLE is a response to the law and economics movement, which is one of the most influential movements in recent legal history. BLE uses behavioral science data to argue that people are not, contrary to law and economic theory, perfectly rational, and offers proposals for how legal institutions should be structured to account for human beings’ irrational tendencies. The success of the BLE movement illustrates the increasing emphasis on taking a multidimensional approach to law.

Although BLE has been tremendously influential in the legal academy, BLE is only one of a number of bodies of research and theory applying social science findings to legal questions. Areas of behavioral science that are relevant to the law include forensic psychology, social psychology, cognitive psychology, criminology, community psychology and abnormal psychology. It is hard to overstate the importance of behavioral science to the development and practice of law. Many students can easily see the connection between psychology and jury decision-making or criminal behavior, but may not appreciate the implications of psychological research for markets, tax, insurance, reproductive technology, campaign finance reform, environmental regulation, contract formation, securities regulation, the legislative process, employment discrimination, trade, immigration and intellectual property. I really enjoy introducing my students to psychological theory and showing them how it applies to legal principles and practice. Frequently, a student will arrive for class eager to share an example of how a theory we discussed in a prior class was perfectly illustrated in a case, a rule of law, or in his or her personal or professional life.

When I first entered the Ph.D. program in social psychology at the University of Virginia, I knew that I wanted to do applied work, but I thought I would end up at a business school. With multiple members of my family practicing law, it was probably inevitable that I would end up focusing my research on questions related to the legal system. In my fourth year as a graduate student, I came to the realization that if I wanted to make meaningful contributions related to the legal system, I would have to go to law school. After all, I could conduct groundbreaking research, but who would take me seriously if I didn’t have an insider’s understanding of the issues? The University of Virginia did not offer a joint degree, so I entered my first year of law school while still a full-time psychology graduate student. Being a student in two graduate schools simultaneously was an eye-opening experience. I can recall sitting in a psychology department meeting listening to social psychologists complain about trial procedures. I remember thinking, “They have no understanding of the practical constraints, the role of precedent or due process, the policy issues or even the goals of the system.” My experience taught me that finding a comfortable place between two disciplines is far from easy. As law becomes increasingly interdisciplinary, divergent philosophical and normative perspectives will clash, and methodological differences will need to be resolved. However, the innovations resulting from the combined efforts of scholars and practitioners in these separate fields will be well worth the effort. It’s an exciting time for anyone doing interdisciplinary work. I’m very grateful to have the opportunity I do to bring knowledge from two disciplines to bear on current legal problems.