Jennifer K. Robbennolt, Jessica Bregant, Verity Winship
{"title":"Settlement schemas: How laypeople understand civil settlement","authors":"Jennifer K. Robbennolt, Jessica Bregant, Verity Winship","doi":"10.1111/jels.12360","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jels.12360","url":null,"abstract":"<p>What does the public think it means to “settle” a civil case? Most legal disputes in the United States end in an agreement to settle, but little is known about what laypeople think about settlement. To fill this gap, we took a direct approach: we asked a nationally representative sample of US adults—more than 1000 of them—basic questions about settlement. We found widespread understanding about the essential nature and frequency of settlement, but persistent, though not universal, misconceptions about the details, including the role of a jury and settlement scope. Because settlement is such a pervasive part of the US legal system, the system's legitimacy turns in part on how the public understands and views civil settlement. The survey reported here provides a foundational study of the understandings and framework—the schemas—that the public bring to settlement.</p>","PeriodicalId":47187,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","volume":"20 3","pages":"488-533"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2023-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jels.12360","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"50152713","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Racial diversity and group decision-making in a mock jury experiment","authors":"","doi":"10.1111/jels.12352","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jels.12352","url":null,"abstract":"<p>\u0000 <span>Hakstian, A.-M.</span>, <span>Evett, S. R.</span>, <span>Hoffmann, J. S.</span>, <span>Marshall, J. M.</span>, <span>Boyland, E. A. L.</span>, & <span>Williams, J. D.</span> (<span>2022</span>). <span>Racial diversity and group decision-making in a mock jury experiment</span>. <i>Journal of Empirical Legal Studies</i>, <span>19</span>(<span>4</span>), <span>1253</span>–<span>1292</span>. https://doi.org/10.1111/jels.12335\u0000 </p><p>In Hakstian et al. (2022), there were errors in Figures 2 and 3, published on Page 1271, the <i>y</i>-axis and the corresponding values on each bar have incorrect commas between the hundred thousand place. The corrected Figures 2 and 3 appear below.</p><p>We apologize for these errors.</p>","PeriodicalId":47187,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","volume":"20 3","pages":"713-714"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2023-05-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jels.12352","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"50129611","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Dhaval Dave, Andrew I. Friedson, Kyutaro Matsuzawa, Drew McNichols, Joseph J. Sabia
{"title":"Sudden lockdown repeals, social mobility, and COVID-19: Evidence from a judicial natural experiment","authors":"Dhaval Dave, Andrew I. Friedson, Kyutaro Matsuzawa, Drew McNichols, Joseph J. Sabia","doi":"10.1111/jels.12348","DOIUrl":"10.1111/jels.12348","url":null,"abstract":"<p>The imposition and lifting of COVID-19 lockdown orders were among the most heatedly debated policies during the pandemic. Credible empirical evaluations of the effects of reopening policies are difficult because policymakers often explicitly linked sustained reductions in COVID-19 cases to the lifting of lockdown orders. This hardwired policy endogeneity creates challenges in isolating the causal effects of lifting of lockdown orders on social mobility and public health. To overcome simultaneity bias, we exploit a natural experiment generated by the Wisconsin Supreme Court when it abolished Wisconsin's “Safer at Home” order on separation-of-powers grounds. We capitalize on this sudden, dramatic, and largely unanticipated termination of a statewide lockdown order to estimate its effect—relative to a more gradual scaling back of restrictions—on social mobility and COVID-19 case growth. First, using anonymized smartphone data from SafeGraph and a synthetic control design, we find that termination of COVID-related restrictions had small and short-lived negative impacts on social distancing. Then, using data on case and mortality rates, we find no evidence that the Wisconsin Supreme Court decision impacted COVID-19 growth up to a month following the repeal. These findings suggest that in the absence of carrying new information, sudden lockdown repeals may generate smaller behavioral responses than policymakers anticipate.</p>","PeriodicalId":47187,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","volume":"20 2","pages":"272-304"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2023-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jels.12348","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47617243","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"How accurate are rebuttable presumptions of pretrial dangerousness? A natural experiment from New Mexico","authors":"Cristopher Moore, Elise Ferguson, Paul Guerin","doi":"10.1111/jels.12351","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jels.12351","url":null,"abstract":"<p>In New Mexico and many other jurisdictions, judges may detain defendants pretrial if the prosecutor proves, through clear and convincing evidence, that releasing them would pose a danger to the public. However, some policymakers argue that certain classes of defendants should have a “rebuttable presumption” of dangerousness, shifting the burden of proof to the defense. Using data on over 15,000 felony defendants who were released pretrial in a 4-year period in New Mexico, we measure how many of them would have been detained by various presumptions, and what fraction of these defendants in fact posed a danger in the sense that they were charged with a new crime during pretrial supervision. We consider presumptions based on the current charge, past convictions, past failures to appear, past violations of conditions of release, and combinations of these drawn from recent legislative proposals. We find that for all these criteria, at most 8% of the defendants they identify are charged pretrial with a new violent crime (felony or misdemeanor), and at most 5% are charged with a new violent felony. The false-positive rate, that is, the fraction of defendants these policies would detain who are not charged with any new crime pretrial, ranges from 71% to 90%. The broadest legislative proposals, such as detaining all defendants charged with a violent felony, are little more accurate than detaining a random sample of defendants released under the current system, and would jail 20 or more people to prevent a single violent felony. We also consider detention recommendations based on risk scores from the Arnold Public Safety Assessment (PSA). Among released defendants with the highest risk score and the “violence flag,” 7% are charged with a new violent felony and 71% are false positives. We conclude that these criteria for rebuttable presumptions do not accurately target dangerous defendants: they cast wide nets and recommend detention for many pretrial defendants who do not pose a danger to the public.</p>","PeriodicalId":47187,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","volume":"20 2","pages":"377-408"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2023-04-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"50153497","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Gender, race, and job satisfaction of law graduates: Intersectional evidence from the National Survey of College Graduates","authors":"Joni Hersch","doi":"10.1111/jels.12346","DOIUrl":"10.1111/jels.12346","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Studies typically find that lawyers have high job satisfaction and that women are not less satisfied than are men. But racial differences as well as gender differences by race or ethnicity in satisfaction may be masked because most lawyers identify as racially White. To examine whether job satisfaction differs by race and whether gender and race/ethnicity have an intersectional relation to job satisfaction, I use data on nearly 13,000 law graduates drawn from six waves of the National Survey of College Graduates (NSCG) conducted between 2003 and 2019. The NSCG uniquely provides a large enough sample to examine intersectionality in job satisfaction of law graduates as well as to compare satisfaction of lawyers to those employed in other occupations. Job satisfaction is strikingly low among Black women and Asian women law graduates. Asian women lawyers have satisfaction similar to White men lawyers but substantially lower satisfaction if not employed as a lawyer. Black women have substantially lower satisfaction in either employment situation. The lower satisfaction of Asian and Black women law graduates is not due to differences in personal characteristics, family status or background, job characteristics, or differences in values.</p>","PeriodicalId":47187,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","volume":"20 2","pages":"339-376"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2023-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42436055","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"An empirical analysis of sentencing of “Access to Information” computer crimes","authors":"James T. Graves, Alessandro Acquisti","doi":"10.1111/jels.12349","DOIUrl":"10.1111/jels.12349","url":null,"abstract":"<p>There is a widespread perception that computer crime sentencing is too harsh. But this criticism has occurred in the absence of comprehensive, multi-year data on how computer crimes are actually sentenced and how those sentences compare to other, purportedly similar crimes, such as trespass, burglary, or fraud. This article uses an analysis of real-world sentencing data to examine how the computer crimes are actually sentenced. We combined court filings and U.S. Sentencing Commission data files to build a custom data set of 1095 Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) sentences from 2005 through 1998. Our results show that CFAA sentences are sentenced differently from trespass, burglary, or non-CFAA fraud crimes; that sentences in which the defendant exceeded authorized access have declined over the years; and that the “sophisticated means” and “special skills” enhancements have been less routinely applied than has been assumed. These results have policy implications for how CFAA crimes are sentenced.</p>","PeriodicalId":47187,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","volume":"20 2","pages":"434-471"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2023-04-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jels.12349","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49438177","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Can you trust your lawyer's call? Legal advisers exhibit myside bias resistant to debiasing interventions","authors":"Mihael A. Jeklic","doi":"10.1111/jels.12350","DOIUrl":"10.1111/jels.12350","url":null,"abstract":"<p>In a vast majority of disputes, settlement is superior to litigation, which involves uncertainty, legal fees, and opportunity cost. Unnecessary litigation also causes judicial backlog, wastes resources, and increases societal conflict. Major contributors to the lack of settlement are intransigent litigants who harbor overoptimistic predictions of litigation outcomes, even though they are looking at identical facts and applicable law. A study (<i>N</i> = 166) found significant myside bias in the participants' predictions of a judicial award (claimants' advisers expected awards that were 69% higher than defendants' advisers) and in their evaluation of arguments (both sides thought the arguments supporting their side were 30% more convincing than the arguments supporting their counterparty). Debiasing interventions—alerting to the myside bias, considering the perspective of the counterparty and dialectical bootstrapping—reduced the bias but did not eliminate it. Exploratory investigation indicated that a large proportion of advisers exhibited naïve realism and bias blind spot, and that cognitive reflection provided a limited measure of resistance to myside bias.</p>","PeriodicalId":47187,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","volume":"20 2","pages":"409-433"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2023-04-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jels.12350","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41886421","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Steven J. Balla, Bridget C. E. Dooling, Daniel R. Pérez
{"title":"Beyond republicans and the disapproval of regulations: A new empirical approach to the Congressional Review Act","authors":"Steven J. Balla, Bridget C. E. Dooling, Daniel R. Pérez","doi":"10.1111/jels.12347","DOIUrl":"10.1111/jels.12347","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Under the Congressional Review Act (CRA), legislators deploy expedited procedures to repeal agency regulations. For decades, the conventional wisdom—drawn from a handful of cases in which rules were repealed—has been that the CRA is primarily used by Republicans to nullify regulations issued at the close of Democratic presidential administrations. In this article, we demonstrate that the conventional wisdom provides an incomplete account of the use of the CRA. The centerpiece of our approach is an original data set of all resolutions disapproving of agency regulations introduced over a 26-year period. The analysis of this data set demonstrates that Democrats make regular use of the CRA and that resolutions are consistently pursued outside of presidential transitions. Given these patterns, we argue (contrary to existing accounts) that the CRA is not inherently deregulatory and routinely has utility as an instrument of position taking for legislators of both political parties.</p>","PeriodicalId":47187,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","volume":"20 2","pages":"472-484"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2023-03-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47598773","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The distribution of in-person public K-12 education in the time of COVID: An empirical perspective","authors":"Michael Heise","doi":"10.1111/jels.12345","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jels.12345","url":null,"abstract":"<p>In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, most schools across the United States abruptly transitioned to remote, virtual learning in the spring of 2020. For the 2020–2021 school year, however, public school districts' instructional mode decisions (in-person, hybrid, and remote) varied across districts and throughout the school year. This study focuses on factors that informed school districts' instructional mode decisions and how student access to in-person instruction, in turn, distributed across districts and students (and their families). Levering the leading nationwide data set gathered by the COVID-19 School Data Hub (“CSDH”), supplemented by district per-pupil spending information as well as various state-level data, this study analyzes the percentage of in-person instruction for the 2020–2021 school year offered by 11,063 regular public school districts from 42 states. Core findings underscore that school districts with Republican governors and in rural areas provided comparably more in-person schooling. Conversely, school districts with higher enrollments and higher percentages of underrepresented minority students provided less. Furthermore, COVID-19-related death rates and the likelihood of in-person schooling were positively related. These findings, while mixed, nonetheless raise troubling equal educational opportunity doctrine questions.</p>","PeriodicalId":47187,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","volume":"20 2","pages":"305-338"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2023-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"50154273","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Export diversification and economic growth in Bangladesh","authors":"M. Azam, Samiha Azam","doi":"10.18488/66.v10i1.3291","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18488/66.v10i1.3291","url":null,"abstract":"Although the growth in exports of Bangladesh over the past few decades has been exemplary, it is enormously concentrated on just one industry which is the Ready Made Garment (RMG) sector. This over dependence on just one sector for export earnings places Bangladesh in a vulnerable position. This study examined the relationship between export diversification and growth rate of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of Bangladesh using annual data from 1995 to 2020. The study utilized the Autoregressive Distributed Lag (ARDL) bounds test to cointegration approach to estimate the long run relationship and the error correction model to determine the existence of a short run relationship. The results from the study indicate that there exists a significant long run cointegrating relationship between overall export diversification and economic growth in Bangladesh. In the long term, if horizontal export diversification increases by 1%, the GDP growth rate shall rise by around 1.7%. Conversely, the short run relationship between export diversification and economic growth is proven to be insignificant. The results of this study implore that Bangladesh should implement strategies and policies that will diversify its exports and shift away from the dominance of just one exporting sector.","PeriodicalId":47187,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","volume":"92 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2023-02-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80316832","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}