Methodological Issues in Court Research

Robin Stryker, Ilene H. Nagel and John Hagan
Additional contact information
Robin Stryker: University of Wisconsin
Ilene H. Nagel: Indiana University School of Law
John Hagan: University of Toronto School of Law

Sociological Methods & Research, 1983, vol. 11, issue 4, 469-500

Abstract: Combining elements of “response as outcome†studies and “response as process†studies overcomes deficiencies resulting from methodological bifurcation, improves our understanding of court outcomes, and leads to theoretical transformation. Using observational and in-depth interview data to inform hypotheses and to create contextual variables, we develop and test models of the pretrial release decision for federal defendants. These models suggest that the emphasis in outcome research on defendants' ascribed status characteristics has been exaggerated. It is asserted that too little attention has been devoted to processual factors, including labeling, and to jurisdictional and organizational factors determining court outcomes.

Date: 1983
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0049124183011004005 (text/html)

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:sae:somere:v:11:y:1983:i:4:p:469-500

DOI: 10.1177/0049124183011004005

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Sociological Methods & Research
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().