9个太多了吗?州最高法院的性别构成如何影响对女性候选人的支持

IF 0.7 4区 社会学 Q3 Social Sciences Justice System Journal Pub Date : 2021-05-18 DOI:10.1080/0098261X.2021.1923589
R. Solberg, Christopher Stout
{"title":"9个太多了吗?州最高法院的性别构成如何影响对女性候选人的支持","authors":"R. Solberg, Christopher Stout","doi":"10.1080/0098261X.2021.1923589","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Women may have broken the glass ceiling in terms of appointments or election to the highest courts in the U.S. but barriers still exist. In this study, we explore whether voters who have the opportunity to select state supreme court justices account for gender composition when deciding whether to support a female candidate. We test this proposition using data from the Judicial Elections Database Initiative and two online experiments. Our own analysis across both the real-world elections and our experiments reveals that voters are not significantly affected by gender diversity on the court when deciding whether to support a judicial female candidate, even when those levels are at an extreme.","PeriodicalId":45509,"journal":{"name":"Justice System Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Is Nine Too Much? How the Gender Composition of State Supreme Courts Influences Support for Female Candidates\",\"authors\":\"R. Solberg, Christopher Stout\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/0098261X.2021.1923589\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Women may have broken the glass ceiling in terms of appointments or election to the highest courts in the U.S. but barriers still exist. In this study, we explore whether voters who have the opportunity to select state supreme court justices account for gender composition when deciding whether to support a female candidate. We test this proposition using data from the Judicial Elections Database Initiative and two online experiments. Our own analysis across both the real-world elections and our experiments reveals that voters are not significantly affected by gender diversity on the court when deciding whether to support a judicial female candidate, even when those levels are at an extreme.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45509,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Justice System Journal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-05-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Justice System Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/0098261X.2021.1923589\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Justice System Journal","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0098261X.2021.1923589","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

在美国最高法院的任命或选举方面,女性可能已经打破了玻璃天花板,但障碍仍然存在。在本研究中,我们探讨有机会选择州最高法院大法官的选民在决定是否支持女性候选人时是否考虑到性别构成。我们使用司法选举数据库倡议和两个在线实验的数据来测试这一命题。我们自己对现实选举和实验的分析表明,在决定是否支持一名女法官候选人时,选民并没有受到法院性别多样性的显著影响,即使在性别多样性达到极端水平时也是如此。
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
Is Nine Too Much? How the Gender Composition of State Supreme Courts Influences Support for Female Candidates
Abstract Women may have broken the glass ceiling in terms of appointments or election to the highest courts in the U.S. but barriers still exist. In this study, we explore whether voters who have the opportunity to select state supreme court justices account for gender composition when deciding whether to support a female candidate. We test this proposition using data from the Judicial Elections Database Initiative and two online experiments. Our own analysis across both the real-world elections and our experiments reveals that voters are not significantly affected by gender diversity on the court when deciding whether to support a judicial female candidate, even when those levels are at an extreme.
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
0.90
自引率
14.30%
发文量
29
期刊介绍: The Justice System Journal is an interdisciplinary journal that publishes original research articles on all aspects of law, courts, court administration, judicial behavior, and the impact of all of these on public and social policy. Open as to methodological approaches, The Justice System Journal aims to use the latest in advanced social science research and analysis to bridge the gap between practicing and academic law, courts and politics communities. The Justice System Journal invites submission of original articles and research notes that are likely to be of interest to scholars and practitioners in the field of law, courts, and judicial administration, broadly defined. Articles may draw on a variety of research approaches in the social sciences. The journal does not publish articles devoted to extended analysis of legal doctrine such as a law review might publish, although short manuscripts analyzing cases or legal issues are welcome and will be considered for the Legal Notes section. The Justice System Journal was created in 1974 by the Institute for Court Management and is published under the auspices of the National Center for State Courts. The Justice System Journal features peer-reviewed research articles as well as reviews of important books in law and courts, and analytical research notes on some of the leading cases from state and federal courts. The journal periodically produces special issues that provide analysis of fundamental and timely issues on law and courts from both national and international perspectives.
期刊最新文献
State Supreme Court Responsiveness to Court Curbing: Examining the Use of Judicial Review The Effects of Jurors’ Initial Views of Jury Service on Predeliberation Preferences for Prosecution or Defense Emerging Hardball Confirmation Tactics and Public Support for the U.S. Supreme Court A War of Words Over Abortion: The Legal-Framing Contest Over the Undue Burden Standard Letter from the Editor
×
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