Judicial decision-making scholars will want to see Why (and When) Judges Dissent: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis, by Lee Epstein (Northwestern), Bill Landes (Chicago), and Richard Posner (CA7 & Chicago). In it, the authors "develops and tests a model of self-interested judicial behavior to explore the phenomenon of judicial dissents, and in particular what we call 'dissent aversion,' which sometimes causes a judge not to dissent even when he disagrees with the majority opinion." An excerpted abstract follows.
"... In the court of appeals, the frequency of dissents is negatively related to the caseload and positively related to ideological diversity among judges in the circuit and circuit size (i.e., the fewer the judges, the greater the collegiality costs of dissenting and therefore, other things being equal, the fewer dissents). We also find that dissents increase the length of majority opinions (imposing collegiality costs by making the majority work harder) and are rarely cited either inside or outside the circuit (reducing the value of dissenting to dissenters). In the Supreme Court, we find that the dissent rate is negatively related to the caseload and positively related to ideological differences, that majority opinions are longer when there is a dissent and that dissents are rarely cited in either the courts of appeals or the Supreme Court."