The Effects of Judicial Campaign Activity on the Legitimacy of Courts

A Survey-based Experiment

Dados Bibliográficos

ID6340862
AutoresJames L Gibson (0000-0002-2571-6596, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA), Jeffrey A Gottfried (The Annenberg School for Communication, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA), Michael X Delli Carpini (The Annenberg School for Communication, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA), Kathleen Hall Jamieson (0000-0002-4167-3688, The Annenberg School for Communication, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA)
Ano2011
Volume64
Fascículo3
Páginas545-558
Data de publicação2011-09-01
Peer ReviewedSim
Open AccessSim
TipoARTICLE
PeriódicoPolitical Research Quarterly (JOURNAL)
Identificadores do periódicoISSN: 1065-9129 • E-ISSN: 1938-274X
EditoraSAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1177/1065912910370684
OpenAlexW2133831945
IdiomaEN
Citações recebidas16
Referências citadas37

The purpose of this article is to investigate the consequences of judicial campaign activity for the perceived legitimacy of the Pennsylvania judiciary. The authors find that politicized campaign ads do detract from court support, although they find practically no difference between traditional campaign ads (e.g., presenting endorsements from groups) and strong attack ads. But this finding must be understood within the context of the 2007 Pennsylvania election increasing court support for all respondents, even those exposed to the most politicized ad content. Being exposed to politicized ads seems to retard the benefits of elections but does not eliminate them

Context (archaeology · Geography · Legitimacy · Political science · Politics · Judicial and Constitutional Studies · Law · Law in Society and Culture · Legal Education and Practice Innovations