In an influential article, Schwartz and Orleans (1967) reported that emphasizing normative obligations to obey the law had a greater positive impact on tax compliance than did emphasizing deterrence factors. In this article, we report the results of a conceptual replication of that earlier experiment, within the context of a dynamic model of tax schema change.

Prior to filing the 1987 tax year return (the first affected by the 1986 Tax Reform Act, TRA), taxpayers viewed one of two videotapes, one emphasizing the social consequences of the TRA and normative duties, the other emphasizing the personal consequences of the TRA and strategies to reduce tax liability. A control group of taxpayers did not receive information about the TRA. Data on attitudes, beliefs, and self-reported compliance were collected at three points during the tax season. Tax return data from the IRS were also obtained. The results indicate that the normative and personal consequences messages had predictable and persistent effects on tax-specific attitudes. However, these effects did not translate into changes in basic values or compliance, as reflected by either the self-report or the official tax return data. Possible explanations for the discrepancy between the results reported by Schwartz and Orleans (1967) and this experiment are considered.

Injury is common in all societies. Americans are perceived as quick to respond to injury by turning to the legal system. This article compares compensation seeking by Americans and Canadians, examining the degree to which cultural factors shape the response of injured parties in the two countries and the extent to which resources and experience influence individual action. Drawing on two large-scale telephone surveys, one conducted in five federal judicial districts around the United States and one conducted in the Canadian province of Ontario, the article looks at the factors that influence claiming and seeking legal assistance. The overall patterns indicate that residents of Ontario are somewhat less likely to claim but more likely to seek legal assistance than are residents of the United States. Moreover, while cultural variations (e.g., religion, type of residence) are good predictors of claiming in Ontario, these factors have little influence on claiming in the United States. As for seeking legal assistance, few predictors are found to influence behavior in the United States while a variety of factors (community size, type of problem, stakes, gender, and education) influence behavior in Ontario.

Researchers use a variety of approaches in analyzing dispute processing outside of adversarial court proceedings. Some emphasize disputant decisionmaking, while others, who generally take a more critical view of these alternatives, approach dispute processing alternatives from the perspective of the state and its interests. In this article I use a third approach which focuses on the political behavior of actors involved in the organization, administration, and staffing of these alternative mechanisms. The approach is applied to a relatively new alternative to adjudication in the courts in India, the lok adalat.

This article examines the work of immigration inspectors—the front-line gatekeepers at ports of entry to the United States who decide whether foreign nationals should be admitted to the country. Described are the shared categories primary inspectors use that help define travelers as referable or nonreferable for further intensive questioning. The study discusses how these judgments arise in the course of doing a distinctive organizational task that fundamentally shapes their character. The study explores the ways in which the nature of categorization and practical decisionmaking in the setting are shaped by agency concerns and the responsibilities and problems of this set of social control agents.

Over the past decade crowded prison conditions became the subject for lawsuits across the country, resulting in restrictions on the “capacity” of prison systems in a number of states. These restrictions produced pressures throughout the criminal justice system, from arrest to release on parole. The question addressed in this research is whether these restrictions and pressures affected the probability and pattern of return to prison among parolees. Data were collected at yearly intervals from four successive cohorts of parolees in Texas. Each cohort was followed for thirty-six months to determine the pattern and probability of returning to prison. Four alternative explanations for shifts in recidivism probabilities are explored using “survival analysis” techniques. Evidence is found for reduced deterrence in addition to effects from cohort composition and administrative discretion.

Gibson (1989) questions whether the Supreme Court's ability to legitimate unpopular policies is based on public views that the Court is a fair decisionmaker. His claim is based on his analysis of a survey examining the ability of the Supreme Court to gain acceptance of the right of an unpopular political group to demonstrate. A reanalysis of Gibson's data using a model allowing for both direct and indirect effects of public views about the fairness of court decisionmaking procedures on acceptance does not support Gibson's conclusion that procedure has no influence on acceptance. Our results indicate that public views about the fairness of Supreme Court decisionmaking procedures have an indirect effect on acceptance through their influence on public views about the Court's legitimacy and support the suggestion of a number of studies that the legitimacy of both local and national legal institutions, and the willingness to accept their decisions, are influenced by views about the fairness of their decisionmaking procedures.

In their essay, Tom Tyler and Ken Rasinski take issue with my analysis of legitimacy and procedural justice. Although my article covered a fair number of different issues, their critique focuses on one particular conclusion. I argued that citizen perceptions of procedural fairness by the U.S. Supreme Court contributed little to the willingness of citizens to comply with unpopular court decisions. Instead, compliance (or acquiescence) was most likely when citizens accorded high levels of diffuse support to the Supreme Court. That is, those who viewed the Supreme Court as a more legitimate institution were more likely to accede to an unpopular decision. I concluded (1989:489): “Thus there is some evidence that the legitimacy of the Court, at least as reflected in levels of diffuse support, affects compliance with unpopular decisons. No such evidence exists for perceptions of procedural justice.”