|
|
| |
Gender and Judicial Discretion: Placing Gender Difference Studies in the Study of Judicial Decision Making |
| | Abstract | Word Stems | Keywords | Association | Citation | Get this Document | Similar Titles |
|
 | You can now view the document associated with this citation by clicking on the "View Document as HTML" link below. |
|
Click here to view the document
|
Abstract:
| This paper locates existing research on gender and judicial discretion within the broader spectrum of judicial discretion research. I identify three waves empirical research on judicial discretion comprised by attitudinal, political and institutional perspectives. I argue that the majority of research on gender and discretion fits into the earliest framework for formulating judicial discretion, the attitudinal perspective. This perspective is the least developed model and has consistently resulted in low levels of predictive power across all variables. Existing research on gender and judicial discretion has found little or no association between a judge’s gender and decision outcomes. However, this paper argues that these conclusions may be a result of the use of an underdeveloped model rather than a lack of relationship between gender and discretion. I suggest that research on gender and judicial discretion needs to be expanded to take advantage of theoretical and empirical advances in research on judicial discretion introduced by later political and institutional perspectives. |
Most Common Document Word Stems:
decis (90), judg (76), judici (57), research (53), polit (50), court (50), attitud (43), model (42), make (40), outcom (36), differ (36), gender (32), approach (27), studi (26), institut (25), predict (25), women (24), case (24), level (23), vote (22), attitudin (22), |
|  | Convention | | Convention is an application service for managing large or small academic conferences, annual meetings, and other types of events! |  | Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf. |  | Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets! |  | Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more! |  | Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering. |  | Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more! |  | Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches! | | Click here for more information. |
|
|
Association:
Name: American Sociological Association
URL: http://www.asanet.org
| Citation:
|
MLA Citation:
| Baker, Kimberly. "Gender and Judicial Discretion: Placing Gender Difference Studies in the Study of Judicial Decision Making" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association, Hilton San Francisco & Renaissance Parc 55 Hotel, San Francisco, CA,, Aug 14, 2004 Online <.PDF>. 2008-09-06 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p109534_index.html> |
APA Citation:
| Baker, K. M. (2004, Aug) "Gender and Judicial Discretion: Placing Gender Difference Studies in the Study of Judicial Decision Making" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association, Hilton San Francisco & Renaissance Parc 55 Hotel, San Francisco, CA, Online <.PDF> Retrieved 2008-09-06 from http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p109534_index.html |
Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: This paper locates existing research on gender and judicial discretion within the broader spectrum of judicial discretion research. I identify three waves empirical research on judicial discretion comprised by attitudinal, political and institutional perspectives. I argue that the majority of research on gender and discretion fits into the earliest framework for formulating judicial discretion, the attitudinal perspective. This perspective is the least developed model and has consistently resulted in low levels of predictive power across all variables. Existing research on gender and judicial discretion has found little or no association between a judge’s gender and decision outcomes. However, this paper argues that these conclusions may be a result of the use of an underdeveloped model rather than a lack of relationship between gender and discretion. I suggest that research on gender and judicial discretion needs to be expanded to take advantage of theoretical and empirical advances in research on judicial discretion introduced by later political and institutional perspectives. |
Get this Document:
Find this citation or document at one or all of these locations below. The links below may have the citation or the entire document for free or you may purchase access to the document. Clicking on these links will change the site you're on and empty your shopping cart.
| Document Type: | .PDF | | Page count: | 20 | | Word count: | 5401 | | Text sample: | | 1 Kimberly Baker Gender and Judicial Discretion: Placing Gender Difference Studies in the Study of Judicial Decision Making Political science literature on women as holders of public office suggests that women face a distinct set of challenges. When running for offices at the local state and federal levels female politicians have to make decisions about how and to what extent to emphasize or de-emphasize their gender (Witt Paget and Matthews 1995). Women politicians have to make these decisions based | | the Votes of Supreme Court Justice in Criminal Cases: 1947-1956 Terms.” American Journal of Political Science. 17: 622-630. ---. 1986. “Are Social Background Models Time Bound?” The American Political Science Review 80: 957-968. Walker Thomas G. and Deborah Barrow. 1985. “The Diversification of the Federal Bench: Policy and Process Ramifications.” The Journal of Politics. 47: 596-617. Watson Richard A. Ronald G. Downing and Frederick C. Spiegel. 1967. “Bar Politics Judicial Selection and the Representation of Social Interests.” The American |
Similar Titles:
The Making of Black Revolutionary Men and Women: A Gendered Approach to Studying the Black Panthers
The Democratic Deficit and Gender Attitudes: Do Attitudes Towards Women?s Role Actually Affect Women?s Rights and Levels of Democracy?
The Supreme Court, U.S. Courts of Appeals, and Immigration Cases: A Case Study of Segmented Institutional Development
Gendered Movement in Embodied Research: A conference demonstration and discussion on performance arts in Gender Studies and Women Studies
|
|
