宪法判决中的意识形态偏见:实验分析与潜在解决方案

IF 1.2 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW
Elena Kantorowicz-Reznichenko, Jarosław Kantorowicz, Keren Weinshall
{"title":"宪法判决中的意识形态偏见:实验分析与潜在解决方案","authors":"Elena Kantorowicz-Reznichenko,&nbsp;Jarosław Kantorowicz,&nbsp;Keren Weinshall","doi":"10.1111/jels.12323","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Despite the importance and neutrality of constitutional rights, empirical research suggests that ideological inclinations unduly affect their assessment and application. In this study, we conducted two experiments in order to investigate the nature of the ideological bias in a constitutionally relevant decision (right-to-demonstration), and how to mitigate it. We find that ideological bias is driven by in-group favoritism. In addition, we find that prior commitment, through a signed declaration, to be impartial or to prioritize constitutional rights encourages participants not to disfavor out-groups. On the other hand, we do not find evidence that using a temporary blinding procedure mitigates the ideological bias.</p>","PeriodicalId":47187,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","volume":"19 3","pages":"716-757"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jels.12323","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ideological bias in constitutional judgments: Experimental analysis and potential solutions\",\"authors\":\"Elena Kantorowicz-Reznichenko,&nbsp;Jarosław Kantorowicz,&nbsp;Keren Weinshall\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jels.12323\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Despite the importance and neutrality of constitutional rights, empirical research suggests that ideological inclinations unduly affect their assessment and application. In this study, we conducted two experiments in order to investigate the nature of the ideological bias in a constitutionally relevant decision (right-to-demonstration), and how to mitigate it. We find that ideological bias is driven by in-group favoritism. In addition, we find that prior commitment, through a signed declaration, to be impartial or to prioritize constitutional rights encourages participants not to disfavor out-groups. On the other hand, we do not find evidence that using a temporary blinding procedure mitigates the ideological bias.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47187,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies\",\"volume\":\"19 3\",\"pages\":\"716-757\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jels.12323\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jels.12323\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jels.12323","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

尽管宪法权利具有重要性和中立性,但实证研究表明,意识形态倾向过度影响了宪法权利的评估和应用。在本研究中,我们进行了两个实验,以调查宪法相关决策(示威权)中意识形态偏见的性质,以及如何减轻这种偏见。我们发现意识形态偏见是由群体内偏爱驱动的。此外,我们发现,通过签署宣言,事先承诺公正或优先考虑宪法权利,可以鼓励参与者不偏袒外群体。另一方面,我们没有发现证据表明使用临时盲化程序可以减轻意识形态偏见。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Ideological bias in constitutional judgments: Experimental analysis and potential solutions

Ideological bias in constitutional judgments: Experimental analysis and potential solutions

Despite the importance and neutrality of constitutional rights, empirical research suggests that ideological inclinations unduly affect their assessment and application. In this study, we conducted two experiments in order to investigate the nature of the ideological bias in a constitutionally relevant decision (right-to-demonstration), and how to mitigate it. We find that ideological bias is driven by in-group favoritism. In addition, we find that prior commitment, through a signed declaration, to be impartial or to prioritize constitutional rights encourages participants not to disfavor out-groups. On the other hand, we do not find evidence that using a temporary blinding procedure mitigates the ideological bias.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
11.80%
发文量
34
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信