Introduction. Empirical research with judicial professionals and courts: Methods and practices
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35295/osls.iisl.1935Keywords:
Empirical research, methodologies, socio-legal studiesAbstract
The articles in this special issue focus on the methodological and practical challenges of undertaking empirical research in judicial and/or court settings. They arose from a workshop at the International Institute for the Sociology of Law held on 23-24 June 2022 which discussed the empirical strategies to access and conduct research with judicial officers and the research methods and kinds of data used, including interviews, surveys, court observations, administrative data, documents, and photographs. The articles draw on the experiences of socio-legal researchers within the field, address the importance of linkages with the justice system and discuss a range of socio-legal insights, methodological approaches and methods from disciplines such as anthropology, law, political science, psychology and sociology.
Downloads
Metrics
Downloads:
13(S1)_Intro_OSLS 328
XML_13(S1)_Introduction_OSLS 37
References
Adams, T., Jones, S.H., and Ellis, C., 2015. Autoethnography: Understanding Qualitative Research. Oxford University Press.
Amietta, S.A., and Barrera, L., 2023. “It’s in the Law”. An Ethnographic Account of the Effects of the Introduction of Lay Participation on Judicial Bureaucracies. Oñati Socio-Legal Series [online], 13(S1-this issue). Available at: https://doi.org/10.35295/osls.iisl.1793
Appleby, G., and Roberts, H., 2023. Studying judges: The role of the Chief Justice, and other institutional actors. Oñati Socio-Legal Series [online], 13(S1-this issue). Available at: https://doi.org/10.35295/osls.iisl.1713
Banakar, R., 2019. On Socio-Legal Design [online]. 2 October. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3463028
Banakar, R., and Travers, M., eds., 2005. Theory and Method in Socio-Legal Research. Oxford: Hart.
Branco, P., 2023. Analysing courthouses’ spaces, places and architecture: some methodological outlines. Oñati Socio-Legal Series [online], 13(S1-this issue). Available at: https://doi.org/10.35295/osls.iisl.1692
Cahill-O’Callaghan, R., 2023. When you cannot ask the judge: Using the case to explore judicial culture. Oñati Socio-Legal Series [online], 13(S1-this issue). Available at: https://doi.org/10.35295/osls.iisl.1745
Casaleiro, P., Relvas, A.P., and Dias, J.P., 2021. A Critical Review of Judicial Professionals Working Conditions’ Studies. International Journal for Court Administration [online], 12(1), 2–28. Available at: https://doi.org/10.36745/ijca.334
Cook, P.S., 2014. “To actually be sociological”: Autoethnography as an assessment and learning tool. Journal of Sociology [online], 50(3), 269–282. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1440783312451780
Cowan, D., et al., 2006. District Judges and Possession Proceedings. Journal of Law and Society 33(4), 547–71.
Dias, J.P., Conceição, G., and Henriques, M., 2023. Conducting socio-legal research in Portugal: from the experience of the Permanent Observatory for Justice to the study of working conditions in courts. Oñati Socio-Legal Series [online], 13(S1-this issue). Available at: https://doi.org/10.35295/osls.iisl.1735
Dobbin, S.A., et al., 2001, Surveying Difficult Populations: Lessons Learned from a National Survey of State Trial Court Judges. Justice System Journal, 22(3), 287–307.
Hannaford-Agor, P., 2023. “How exactly is it done here?” Conducting cross-jurisdictional research with judges and court staff. Oñati Socio-Legal Series [online], 13(S1-this issue). Available at: https://doi.org/10.35295/osls.iisl.1702
Hunter, C., Nixon, J., and Blandy, S., 2008. Researching the Judiciary: Exploring the Invisible in Judicial Decision Making. Journal of Law and Society, 35(s1), 76–90.
Hunter, J., 2023. Two tiers of judicial officers. Oñati Socio-Legal Series [online], 13(S1-this issue). Available at: https://doi.org/10.35295/osls.iisl.1755
Mark, A., 2023. Perceptions of administrative policymaking authority: evidence from interviews in three state court systems. Oñati Socio-Legal Series [online], 13(S1-this issue). Available at: https://doi.org/10.35295/osls.iisl.1706
Moran, L.J., 2015. Judicial pictures as legal life-writing data and a research method. Journal of Law and Society 42, 74–101.
Mulcahy, L., 2011. Legal Architecture: Justice, Due Process and the Place of Law. London: Routledge.
Mulcahy, L., and Tsalapatanis, A., 2023. Handmaidens, partners or go-betweens: Reflections on the push and pull of the judicial and justice policy audience. Oñati Socio-Legal Series [online], 13(S1-this issue). Available at: https://doi.org/10.35295/osls.iisl.1707
Opeskin, B., 2013. The State of the Judicature: A Statistical Profile of Australian Courts and Judges. Sydney Law Review, 35, 489–517.
Opeskin, B., 2023. Lazy data? Using administrative records in research on judicial systems. Oñati Socio-Legal Series [online], 13(S1-this issue). Available at: https://doi.org/10.35295/osls.iisl.1624
Roach Anleu, S., and Mack, K., 2023. Empirical Research with Judicial Officers: The Biography of a Research Project. Oñati Socio-Legal Series [online], 13(S1-this issue). Available at: https://doi.org/10.35295/osls.iisl.1726
Roberts, H., 2014. Telling a history of Australian women judges through courts’ ceremonial archives. Australian Feminist Law Journal, 40, 147–162.
Weill, S., 2023. Engaging with court research: The case of French terror trials. Oñati Socio-Legal Series [online], 13(S1-this issue). Available at: https://doi.org/10.35295/osls.iisl.1732
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Paula Casaleiro, Sharyn Roach Anleu, João Paulo Dias
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
OSLS strictly respects intellectual property rights and it is our policy that the author retains copyright, and articles are made available under a Creative Commons licence. The Creative Commons Non-Commercial Attribution No-Derivatives licence is our default licence, further details available at https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 If this is not acceptable to you, please contact us.
The non-exclusive permission you grant to us includes the rights to disseminate the bibliographic details of the article, including the abstract supplied by you, and to authorise others, including bibliographic databases, indexing and contents alerting services, to copy and communicate these details.
For information on how to share and store your own article at each stage of production from submission to final publication, please read our Self-Archiving and Sharing policy.
The Copyright Notice showing the author and co-authors, and the Creative Commons license will be displayed on the article, and you must agree to this as part of the submission process. Please ensure that all co-authors are properly attributed and that they understand and accept these terms.
