Surveys and Experiments in Antitrust Litigation: Market Definition, SSNIP, and Beyond

Surveys and experiments are becoming increasingly important in antitrust litigation as courts look for empirical evidence to understand market definition, substitution, and consumer behavior. These tools provide insights that traditional market data often cannot. This also can bring potential risks: courts scrutinize methodology closely, and poorly designed surveys can weaken a case.

Ceren Canal Aruoba and Kristina Shampanier argue that practitioners must design surveys and experiments deliberately aligned with the legal aspect by choosing the right consumer population, using unbiased questions, and validating findings against real‑world data. Experimental methods are gaining traction, and courts have cited them as more reliable than self‑reported responses.

With cases like FTC v. Meta highlighting how strong empirical evidence can shape outcomes, the use of experiments in survey form and real-world measurements is reshaping antitrust litigation.