Scaling Court Decisions with Citation Networks
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 13046331 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Christian Arnold (0000-0002-7042-594X, Cardiff University, corresponding author), Benjamin G Engst (0000-0002-8040-654X, University of Konstanz), Thomas Gschwend (0000-0002-8656-9622, University of Mannheim) |
| Year | 2021 |
| Volume | 11 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 25-44 |
| Publication date | 2021-11-23 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Journal of Law and Courts (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 2164-6589 • E-ISSN: 2164-6570 |
| Publisher | Cambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1086/717420 |
| OpenAlex | W3216658103 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 3 |
| References cited | 43 |
To compare court decisions in a systematic way, it is typically necessary to first read these decisions and then apply legal methods to them. Measurement models that support analysts in this manual labor usually rely on judges’ voting records. Since these data are often not available, we instead propose a latent-variable model that uses the widely available references in court decisions to measure the decisions’ latent position in their common case-space. We showcase our model in the context of forum shopping and forum selling of Germany’s lower courts
Business · Citation · Context (archaeology · Data science · Geography · Judicial opinion · Machine learning · Multidimensional scaling · Political science · Politics · Position (finance · Voting · Artificial Intelligence in Law · Computer Science · Judicial and Constitutional Studies · Law · Political Influence and Corporate Strategies
Quantitative Rechtswissenschaft
Introduction to Information Retrieval
Data Analysis Using Regression and Multilevel/Hierarchical Models
Bayesian Analysis for the Social Sciences
The Judicial Common Space
The Growing Complexity of the International Court of Justice’s Self-Citation Network
The Electoral Connection
Newspaper Coverage of Political Scandals
Precedent in International Courts
Justices and Legal Clarity
Network Analysis and the Law
Dynamic Ideal Point Estimation via Markov Chain Monte Carlo for the U.S. Supreme Court, 1953–1999
Predicting Drift on Politically Insulated Institutions
Political Constraints on Legal Doctrine
The Genealogy of Law
Multidimensional Analysis of Roll Call Data via Bayesian Simulation
Birds of the Same Feather Tweet Together
Constitutional courts as veto players
Dissent in Iberia
Bayesian Analysis for Political Research
The New Judicial Politics of Legal Doctrine
Locating Supreme Court Opinions in Doctrine Space
Predicting and Interpolating State‐Level Polls Using Twitter Textual Data
Who Controls the Content of Supreme Court Opinions
Into the Words
The Decisions and Ideal Points of British Law Lords
The German Advantage in Civil Procedure
How Censorship in China Allows Government Criticism but Silences Collective Expression
The Statistical Analysis of Roll Call Data
| Unique citing works | 3 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 1,5 |
| Citation span | 2024 - 2026 (3) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 2 |