Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-q6k6v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-12T04:41:07.919Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Judicial Process and Behavior during the Sixties: A Subfield, Interdisciplinary, and Crosscultural Overview

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2022

Glendon Schubert
Glendon Schubert*
Affiliation:
University of Hawaii
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Many of the leading contributors to the judicial process and behavior field are persons who completed an LL.B., and then moved on to a doctorate and to teaching in political science; very few persons have gone the opposite route since the end of World War II. One of that tiny minority is the author of a recent PS article, “Who is Listening?” in which he observed that “it may be significant that some of the older generation [of traditional public law scholars] wound up teaching in law schools jointly or exclusively.” It may also be significant that it did not occur to him how well the shoe fits.

Robert Dixon inappropriately subtitled his essay “Political Science Research in Public Law” — inappropriately because what he thereby denotes is virtually a null category. Even so, his may well prove to have been the last gasp of reactionary legalism, at least in the professional literature of political science.

Type
Research Article
Information
PS: Political Science & Politics , Volume 5 , Issue 1 , Winter 1972 , pp. 6 - 15
Copyright
Copyright © The American Political Science Association 1972

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

This essay is a summary of my detailed bibliographical survey, which cites and discusses more than a thousand items: “Judicial Process and Behavior, 1963–1971,” in James A. Robinson (ed.), Political Science Annual: An International Review; Volume Three (Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill), scheduled for publication in August 1972. The organization of the present summary parallels that of the text of the main survey to which it is related.

References

1 E.g., Becker, Danelski, Nagel, Rosenblum, Sigler, and Watson.

2 Dixon, Robert G. Jr., “Who is Listening? Political Science Research in Public Law,” PS: Political Science & Politics, Vol. IV, No. 1 (Winter, 1971), 19–26, at p. 19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

3 Shklar, Judith, Legalism (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1964).Google Scholar

4 Dixon, op. cit. pp. 19, 21.

5 Wiener, Frederick Bernays, “Decision Prediction by Computers: Nonsense Cubed — and Worse,” American Bar Association Journal, XLVIII (1962), 1023–1028.Google Scholar

6 See the headnote.

7 Law and Society Review, III (1968), 163.

8 Treves, Renato and Loon, J. F. Glastra van, eds. Norms and Actions: National Reports on Sociology of Law (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1968).CrossRefGoogle Scholar