书评文章

Q3 Social Sciences Issues in Legal Scholarship Pub Date : 2015-01-01 DOI:10.1515/ils-2016-0259
L. Barnett
{"title":"书评文章","authors":"L. Barnett","doi":"10.1515/ils-2016-0259","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The Essay reviews a book on law-pertinent empirical research methods and data, but is mainly devoted to placing the subject of the book in context. The Essay thus (i) supplies a quantitative measure of the progress of the social sciences since the start of the twentieth century; and (ii) reports a regression analysis of data to identify variables that account for the frequency with which articles in general-purpose U.S. law reviews have relied on quantitative evidence. The Essay also considers the incorporation of empirical social science into law schools.","PeriodicalId":34921,"journal":{"name":"Issues in Legal Scholarship","volume":"13 1","pages":"29 - 48"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Book Review Essay\",\"authors\":\"L. Barnett\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/ils-2016-0259\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract The Essay reviews a book on law-pertinent empirical research methods and data, but is mainly devoted to placing the subject of the book in context. The Essay thus (i) supplies a quantitative measure of the progress of the social sciences since the start of the twentieth century; and (ii) reports a regression analysis of data to identify variables that account for the frequency with which articles in general-purpose U.S. law reviews have relied on quantitative evidence. The Essay also considers the incorporation of empirical social science into law schools.\",\"PeriodicalId\":34921,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Issues in Legal Scholarship\",\"volume\":\"13 1\",\"pages\":\"29 - 48\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Issues in Legal Scholarship\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/ils-2016-0259\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Issues in Legal Scholarship","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/ils-2016-0259","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要本文回顾了一本关于法律相关的实证研究方法和数据的书,但主要致力于将该书的主题置于背景中。因此,本文(i)提供了自20世纪初以来社会科学进步的定量衡量标准;(ii)报告数据的回归分析,以确定导致美国通用法律评论中文章依赖定量证据的频率的变量。本文还考虑了实证社会科学与法学院的结合。
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
Book Review Essay
Abstract The Essay reviews a book on law-pertinent empirical research methods and data, but is mainly devoted to placing the subject of the book in context. The Essay thus (i) supplies a quantitative measure of the progress of the social sciences since the start of the twentieth century; and (ii) reports a regression analysis of data to identify variables that account for the frequency with which articles in general-purpose U.S. law reviews have relied on quantitative evidence. The Essay also considers the incorporation of empirical social science into law schools.
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
Issues in Legal Scholarship
Issues in Legal Scholarship Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Issues in Legal Scholarship presents cutting-edge legal and policy research using the format of online peer-reviewed symposia. The journal’s emphasis on interdisciplinary work and legal theory extends to recent symposium topics such as Single-Sex Marriage, The Reformation of American Administrative Law, and Catastrophic Risks. The symposia systematically address emerging issues of great significance, offering ongoing scholarship of interest to a wide range of policy and legal researchers. Online publication makes it possible for other researchers to find the best and latest quickly, as well as to join in further discussion. Each symposium aims to be a living forum with ongoing publications and commentaries.
期刊最新文献
Current understanding of extracellular vesicle homing/tropism. Tort Policy in a Plural Context: Pathways Towards Objective Liability in UAE Tort Law Eliciting Best Evidence from a Child Witness: A Comparative Study of the United Kingdom and India Bumped Redundancy and the Range of Reasonable Responses: To what Extent, if any, should Employers Consider Bumping? Life after Mirab v Mentor Graphics Limited UKEAT/0172/17DA Deconstructing the Opacity of Pari Passu Clause as a Pathway to Interpretative Clarity: Guidepost to Optimal Adjudicatory Outcomes
×
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