Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T06:37:48.002Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

[no title]

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

S. Sidney Ulmer*
Affiliation:
University of Kentucky

Abstract

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Communications to the Editor
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1967

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Theodore L. Becker, “A Survey Study of Hawaiian Judges: The Effect on Decisions of Judicial Role Variations,” this Review, 60 (Sept. 1966), 677–680.

2 Ibid., p. 677.

3 March, James G., “Sociological Jurisprudence Revisited, A Review (More or Less) of Max Gluckman,” Stanford Law Review, 8 (1956), p. 505CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

4 Op. cit., p. 679.

5 Since objective decision is defined as a decision consistent with the requirement of precedent but contrary to the judge's own “enlightened” view, it is necessary to know whether all judges perceive the requirement of precedent in a given hypothetical case in similar terms. Although the author does not go into this question, consensual cognition must be assumed in his model. Such an assumption may be questioned.

6 See: Guilford, J. P., Fundamental Statistics in Psychology and Education (New York: 1956), p. 237Google Scholar.

7 A more detailed explanation of this “theory” and the data breakdown used are available on request.

Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.