0
Your cart

Your cart is empty

Browse All Departments
  • All Departments
Price
  • R1,000 - R2,500 (2)
  • R2,500 - R5,000 (2)
  • -
Status
Brand

Showing 1 - 4 of 4 matches in All Departments

Making Law and Courts Research Relevant - The Normative Implications of Empirical Research (Paperback): Brandon L. Bartels,... Making Law and Courts Research Relevant - The Normative Implications of Empirical Research (Paperback)
Brandon L. Bartels, Chris W. Bonneau
R1,534 Discovery Miles 15 340 Ships in 12 - 17 working days

One of the more enduring topics of concern for empirically-oriented scholars of law and courts-and political scientists more generally-is how research can be more directly relevant to broader audiences outside of academia. A significant part of this issue goes back to a seeming disconnect between empirical and normative scholars of law and courts that has increased in recent years. Brandon L. Bartels and Chris W. Bonneau argue that being attuned to the normative implications of one's work enhances the quality of empirical work, not to mention makes it substantially more interesting to both academics and non-academic practitioners. Their book's mission is to examine how the normative implications of empirical work in law and courts can be more visible and relevant to audiences beyond academia. Written by scholars of political science, law, and sociology, the chapters in the volume offer ideas on a methodology for communicating normative implications in a balanced, nuanced, and modest manner. The contributors argue that if empirical work is strongly suggestive of certain policy or institutional changes, scholars should make those implications known so that information can be diffused. The volume consists of four sections that respectively address the general enterprise of developing normative implications of empirical research, law and decisionmaking, judicial selection, and courts in the broader political and societal context. This volume represents the start of a conversation on the topic of how the normative implications of empirical research in law and courts can be made more visible. This book will primarily interest scholars of law and courts, as well as students of judicial politics. Other subfields of political science engaging in empirical research will also find the suggestions made in the book relevant.

Making Law and Courts Research Relevant - The Normative Implications of Empirical Research (Hardcover): Brandon L. Bartels,... Making Law and Courts Research Relevant - The Normative Implications of Empirical Research (Hardcover)
Brandon L. Bartels, Chris W. Bonneau
R4,148 Discovery Miles 41 480 Ships in 12 - 17 working days

One of the more enduring topics of concern for empirically-oriented scholars of law and courts-and political scientists more generally-is how research can be more directly relevant to broader audiences outside of academia. A significant part of this issue goes back to a seeming disconnect between empirical and normative scholars of law and courts that has increased in recent years. Brandon L. Bartels and Chris W. Bonneau argue that being attuned to the normative implications of one's work enhances the quality of empirical work, not to mention makes it substantially more interesting to both academics and non-academic practitioners. Their book's mission is to examine how the normative implications of empirical work in law and courts can be more visible and relevant to audiences beyond academia. Written by scholars of political science, law, and sociology, the chapters in the volume offer ideas on a methodology for communicating normative implications in a balanced, nuanced, and modest manner. The contributors argue that if empirical work is strongly suggestive of certain policy or institutional changes, scholars should make those implications known so that information can be diffused. The volume consists of four sections that respectively address the general enterprise of developing normative implications of empirical research, law and decisionmaking, judicial selection, and courts in the broader political and societal context. This volume represents the start of a conversation on the topic of how the normative implications of empirical research in law and courts can be made more visible. This book will primarily interest scholars of law and courts, as well as students of judicial politics. Other subfields of political science engaging in empirical research will also find the suggestions made in the book relevant.

Curbing the Court - Why the Public Constrains Judicial Independence (Paperback): Brandon L. Bartels, Christopher D. Johnston Curbing the Court - Why the Public Constrains Judicial Independence (Paperback)
Brandon L. Bartels, Christopher D. Johnston
R1,098 Discovery Miles 10 980 Ships in 10 - 15 working days

What motivates political actors with diverging interests to respect the Supreme Court's authority? A popular answer is that the public serves as the guardian of judicial independence by punishing elected officials who undermine the justices. Curbing the Court challenges this claim, presenting a new theory of how we perceive the Supreme Court. Bartels and Johnston argue that, contrary to conventional wisdom, citizens are not principled defenders of the judiciary. Instead, they seek to limit the Court's power when it suits their political aims, and this inclination is heightened during times of sharp partisan polarization. Backed by a wealth of observational and experimental data, Bartels and Johnston push the conceptual, theoretical, and empirical boundaries of the study of public opinion of the courts. By connecting citizens to the strategic behavior of elites, this book offers fresh insights into the vulnerability of judicial institutions in an increasingly contentious era of American politics.

Curbing the Court - Why the Public Constrains Judicial Independence (Hardcover): Brandon L. Bartels, Christopher D. Johnston Curbing the Court - Why the Public Constrains Judicial Independence (Hardcover)
Brandon L. Bartels, Christopher D. Johnston
R2,853 Discovery Miles 28 530 Ships in 10 - 15 working days

What motivates political actors with diverging interests to respect the Supreme Court's authority? A popular answer is that the public serves as the guardian of judicial independence by punishing elected officials who undermine the justices. Curbing the Court challenges this claim, presenting a new theory of how we perceive the Supreme Court. Bartels and Johnston argue that, contrary to conventional wisdom, citizens are not principled defenders of the judiciary. Instead, they seek to limit the Court's power when it suits their political aims, and this inclination is heightened during times of sharp partisan polarization. Backed by a wealth of observational and experimental data, Bartels and Johnston push the conceptual, theoretical, and empirical boundaries of the study of public opinion of the courts. By connecting citizens to the strategic behavior of elites, this book offers fresh insights into the vulnerability of judicial institutions in an increasingly contentious era of American politics.

Free Delivery
Pinterest Twitter Facebook Google+
You may like...
Tommee Tippee - Closer to Nature Soother…
R150 R137 Discovery Miles 1 370
Home Quip Stainless Steel Double Wall…
R181 R155 Discovery Miles 1 550
JCB Chelsea Crazy Horse Soft Toe Safety…
R1,459 Discovery Miles 14 590
How To Fix (Unf*ck) A Country - 6 Things…
Roy Havemann Paperback R310 R210 Discovery Miles 2 100
Bullsh!t - 50 Fibs That Made South…
Jonathan Ancer Paperback  (2)
R270 R180 Discovery Miles 1 800
Loot
Nadine Gordimer Paperback  (2)
R398 R330 Discovery Miles 3 300
Casio LW-200-7AV Watch with 10-Year…
R999 R884 Discovery Miles 8 840
Little Black Book
Brittany Murphy, Ron Livingston, … DVD  (2)
R35 Discovery Miles 350
Loot
Nadine Gordimer Paperback  (2)
R398 R330 Discovery Miles 3 300
Bestway Spiderman Swim Ring (Diameter…
R48 Discovery Miles 480

 

Partners