Methodological Issues in Court Research

Pretrial Release Decisions for Federal Defendants

Robin S Stryker, Ilene H. Nagel, John Hagan

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

20 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Combining elements of “response as outcome” studies and “response as process” studies overcomes deficiencies resulting from methodological bifurcation, improves our understanding of court outcomes, and leads to theoretical transformation. Using observational and in-depth interview data to inform hypotheses and to create contextual variables, we develop and test models of the pretrial release decision for federal defendants. These models suggest that the emphasis in outcome research on defendants' ascribed status characteristics has been exaggerated. It is asserted that too little attention has been devoted to processual factors, including labeling, and to jurisdictional and organizational factors determining court outcomes.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)469-500
Number of pages32
JournalSociological Methods & Research
Volume11
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - 1983
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

interview

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Social Sciences (miscellaneous)
  • Sociology and Political Science

Cite this

Methodological Issues in Court Research : Pretrial Release Decisions for Federal Defendants. / Stryker, Robin S; Nagel, Ilene H.; Hagan, John.

In: Sociological Methods & Research, Vol. 11, No. 4, 1983, p. 469-500.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{0f7ec4ee35d64262b8b0dcc0d2f07cd9,
title = "Methodological Issues in Court Research: Pretrial Release Decisions for Federal Defendants",
abstract = "Combining elements of “response as outcome” studies and “response as process” studies overcomes deficiencies resulting from methodological bifurcation, improves our understanding of court outcomes, and leads to theoretical transformation. Using observational and in-depth interview data to inform hypotheses and to create contextual variables, we develop and test models of the pretrial release decision for federal defendants. These models suggest that the emphasis in outcome research on defendants' ascribed status characteristics has been exaggerated. It is asserted that too little attention has been devoted to processual factors, including labeling, and to jurisdictional and organizational factors determining court outcomes.",
author = "Stryker, {Robin S} and Nagel, {Ilene H.} and John Hagan",
year = "1983",
doi = "10.1177/0049124183011004005",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "11",
pages = "469--500",
journal = "Sociological Methods and Research",
issn = "0049-1241",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Methodological Issues in Court Research

T2 - Pretrial Release Decisions for Federal Defendants

AU - Stryker, Robin S

AU - Nagel, Ilene H.

AU - Hagan, John

PY - 1983

Y1 - 1983

N2 - Combining elements of “response as outcome” studies and “response as process” studies overcomes deficiencies resulting from methodological bifurcation, improves our understanding of court outcomes, and leads to theoretical transformation. Using observational and in-depth interview data to inform hypotheses and to create contextual variables, we develop and test models of the pretrial release decision for federal defendants. These models suggest that the emphasis in outcome research on defendants' ascribed status characteristics has been exaggerated. It is asserted that too little attention has been devoted to processual factors, including labeling, and to jurisdictional and organizational factors determining court outcomes.

AB - Combining elements of “response as outcome” studies and “response as process” studies overcomes deficiencies resulting from methodological bifurcation, improves our understanding of court outcomes, and leads to theoretical transformation. Using observational and in-depth interview data to inform hypotheses and to create contextual variables, we develop and test models of the pretrial release decision for federal defendants. These models suggest that the emphasis in outcome research on defendants' ascribed status characteristics has been exaggerated. It is asserted that too little attention has been devoted to processual factors, including labeling, and to jurisdictional and organizational factors determining court outcomes.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84977033720&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84977033720&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/0049124183011004005

DO - 10.1177/0049124183011004005

M3 - Article

VL - 11

SP - 469

EP - 500

JO - Sociological Methods and Research

JF - Sociological Methods and Research

SN - 0049-1241

IS - 4

ER -