过渡时期司法是如何重要的?扩大和完善转型期司法政策效果的定量研究

IF 1 2区 社会学 Q3 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS Journal of Human Rights Pub Date : 2022-02-15 DOI:10.1080/14754835.2021.2013175
M. Murphy
{"title":"过渡时期司法是如何重要的?扩大和完善转型期司法政策效果的定量研究","authors":"M. Murphy","doi":"10.1080/14754835.2021.2013175","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Although the field of transitional justice is expanding rapidly, research on its effects remains underdeveloped, despite its presumed importance for human rights and democratic consolidation. The field suffers from incompatible approaches and definitions, disputed causal models and conclusions, and a multiplicity of dependent variables. Quantitative work struggles to ground measurement and hypothesis testing in nuanced conceptions of transitional justice’s causal processes. Robust understanding of effects requires integrating qualitative and quantitative approaches while balancing accuracy with parsimony. This article first revisits and builds on a key quantitative work: Olsen et al.’s Transitional justice in balance (2010). Using an expanded dataset to repeat their descriptive and statistical analysis of the effects of transitional justice, the article finds results only marginally consistent with their original findings. This reassessment is the basis for proposed revisions to their causal model, conceptualization, measurement, and hypothesis testing. The proposed approach includes a two-step causal model, differentiated measurement of transitional justice mechanisms, and hypotheses that are more deeply grounded in the insights of qualitative studies. These revisions provide a framework with rich potential for comparative quantitative analysis of the effects of transitional justice.","PeriodicalId":51734,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Human Rights","volume":"21 1","pages":"485 - 499"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How does transitional justice matter? Expanding and refining quantitative research on the effects of transitional justice policies\",\"authors\":\"M. Murphy\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14754835.2021.2013175\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Although the field of transitional justice is expanding rapidly, research on its effects remains underdeveloped, despite its presumed importance for human rights and democratic consolidation. The field suffers from incompatible approaches and definitions, disputed causal models and conclusions, and a multiplicity of dependent variables. Quantitative work struggles to ground measurement and hypothesis testing in nuanced conceptions of transitional justice’s causal processes. Robust understanding of effects requires integrating qualitative and quantitative approaches while balancing accuracy with parsimony. This article first revisits and builds on a key quantitative work: Olsen et al.’s Transitional justice in balance (2010). Using an expanded dataset to repeat their descriptive and statistical analysis of the effects of transitional justice, the article finds results only marginally consistent with their original findings. This reassessment is the basis for proposed revisions to their causal model, conceptualization, measurement, and hypothesis testing. The proposed approach includes a two-step causal model, differentiated measurement of transitional justice mechanisms, and hypotheses that are more deeply grounded in the insights of qualitative studies. These revisions provide a framework with rich potential for comparative quantitative analysis of the effects of transitional justice.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51734,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Human Rights\",\"volume\":\"21 1\",\"pages\":\"485 - 499\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-02-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Human Rights\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14754835.2021.2013175\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Human Rights","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14754835.2021.2013175","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

虽然过渡司法领域正在迅速扩大,但对其影响的研究仍然不发达,尽管它被认为对人权和民主巩固具有重要意义。该领域存在不相容的方法和定义,有争议的因果模型和结论,以及多种因变量。定量工作努力在过渡司法因果过程的微妙概念中进行基础测量和假设检验。对效果的强大理解需要整合定性和定量方法,同时平衡准确性和简约性。本文首先回顾并建立了一个关键的定量工作:奥尔森等人的过渡正义平衡(2010)。使用扩展的数据集来重复他们对过渡时期司法影响的描述性和统计分析,文章发现结果与他们最初的发现只是略微一致。这种重新评估是对其因果模型、概念化、测量和假设检验提出修订建议的基础。提出的方法包括一个两步因果模型,过渡性司法机制的差异化测量,以及更深入地扎根于定性研究见解的假设。这些修订为对过渡时期司法的影响进行比较定量分析提供了一个具有丰富潜力的框架。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
How does transitional justice matter? Expanding and refining quantitative research on the effects of transitional justice policies
Abstract Although the field of transitional justice is expanding rapidly, research on its effects remains underdeveloped, despite its presumed importance for human rights and democratic consolidation. The field suffers from incompatible approaches and definitions, disputed causal models and conclusions, and a multiplicity of dependent variables. Quantitative work struggles to ground measurement and hypothesis testing in nuanced conceptions of transitional justice’s causal processes. Robust understanding of effects requires integrating qualitative and quantitative approaches while balancing accuracy with parsimony. This article first revisits and builds on a key quantitative work: Olsen et al.’s Transitional justice in balance (2010). Using an expanded dataset to repeat their descriptive and statistical analysis of the effects of transitional justice, the article finds results only marginally consistent with their original findings. This reassessment is the basis for proposed revisions to their causal model, conceptualization, measurement, and hypothesis testing. The proposed approach includes a two-step causal model, differentiated measurement of transitional justice mechanisms, and hypotheses that are more deeply grounded in the insights of qualitative studies. These revisions provide a framework with rich potential for comparative quantitative analysis of the effects of transitional justice.
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
3.10
自引率
21.10%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Copy thy neighbor: Spatial interdependences in the democracy-repression nexus From human rights to “righteous humans”: Brazilian foreign policy in the Bolsonaro era Disruption and emergence: How to think about human rights futures How to consolidate quickly: The cases of Algeria and Tunisia Meanings of the human rights concept: Tunisian activism in the 1970s
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1