Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
The Psychology of Judicial Decision Making$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

David E. Klein and Gregory Mitchell

Print publication date: 2010

Print ISBN-13: 9780195367584

Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: May 2010

DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195367584.001.0001

Searching for Constraint in Legal Decision Making

Chapter:
(p. 203 ) 13 Searching for Constraint in Legal Decision Making
Source:
The Psychology of Judicial Decision Making
Author(s):

Eileen Braman

Publisher:
Oxford University Press
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195367584.003.0013

This essay is about constraint in legal decision making: how we should conceptualize it, how we should study it, and why psychological theory and methods provide such a promising avenue for doing so. I treat constraint as a “democratic good,” necessary to justify the distributional decisions of unelected judges and as an empirical question: Does meaningful constraint exist? If so, where are we likely to find it? What are the potential sources of constraint in legal decision making? Asking these questions should lead to what I hope will be the next generation of empirical research on legal reasoning involving a wealth of theoretically based questions of interest to scholars in numerous disciplines.

Keywords:   judicial decision making, judicial constraint, legal model, attitudinal model

Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .