Beyond replication: A few comments on Spruk and Kovac and Martin-Quinn scores

Michael Heise

International Review of Law and Economics, 2020, vol. 61, issue C

Abstract: This Comment discusses Spruk and Kovac’s (2020) replication and extension of a prominent judicial ideology measure, the Martin-Quinn (2002) scores. Spruk and Kovac’s main contribution is to replicate Martin-Quinn scores’ Justice-level ideal points incident to a slightly different empirical strategy. Spruk and Kovac then extend their analysis by exploiting another prominent data set, Spaeth et al.’s (2018) Supreme Court Database, and identifying specific case issue codes that account for a large share of the Justice ideal points’ variation. For reasons that I outline below, while the Spruk and Kovac paper largely achieves its immediate replication objectives, the paper’s extension effort, by contrast, confronts inevitable limitations necessarily imposed by the Spaeth et al. database.

Keywords: Replication; Empirical legal studies; Courts; Judicial decisionmaking; Judge; Judge ideology; Martin-Quinn; Supreme Court (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2020
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0144818820300193
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:irlaec:v:61:y:2020:i:c:s0144818820300193

DOI: 10.1016/j.irle.2020.105891

Access Statistics for this article

International Review of Law and Economics is currently edited by C. Ott, A. W. Katz and H-B. Schäfer

More articles in International Review of Law and Economics from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().