Empirical Legal Studies

Ribstein's rundown of papers at CELS

Larry Ribstein has a nice post that summarizes some of the papers at the Second Annual Conference on Empirical Legal Studies.

UCLA-Rand Conference on Transparency

ELS Blog readers located in Southern California might be interested in this event:

UCLA School of Law and RAND Institute for Civil Justice are co-hosting a conference on Transparency in the Civil Justice System on Nov. 2 at UCLA School of Law (details here).  Researchers who are based primarily at the RAND Institute for Civil Justice and UCLA School of Law are collaborating on an analysis of the issue of transparency, both its advantages and disadvantages, in many aspects of the civil justice system. The following questions guide their research:

• Are there specific examples of problems in the civil justice system that might have been avoided if the system were more transparent? What are the risks associated with too much transparency?
• How can the civil justice system balance the value of privacy with the value of transparency?
• What mechanisms are involved in providing greater transparency? What are the costs, and who pays them?
• Will greater transparency improve the civil justice system? Is it likely to improve accountability and increase public confidence?
• Are there examples of reforms that have led to greater transparency? Have they affected outcomes in the system? Have they improved efficiency in the system?
• Can plaintiffs and defendants agree on a cohesive vision of increased transparency in the civil justice system?

    The keynote address will be delivered by Ron George, Chief Justice of the California Supreme Court.  The opening remarks will be delivered by Ken Feinberg, Special Master of the 9/11 Victims Compensation Fund.

7th Circuit Conference

Steve Wasby sent me the following announcement to pass along:

Southern Illinois University-Carbondale's School of Law announces conference on the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.

The conference will be held on February 22 and 23, 2008, at the law school.  The focus of the conference will be on the process by which the court decides cases, including its relations with other courts. Topics to be covered include aspects of the judges' decision-making; the court's caseload and how it is handled; the way in which circuit precedent is developed and announced; and the court's relationship to district courts and the Supreme Court. This will be one of the first academic conferences to examine the workings of this important and influential court. Presenters and commentators will include several judges of the court, district judges, and political science and law professors.

There will be no registration fee for the conference, but advance registration will be required. The conference is offered for CLE credit, which will require a fee. Those who wish information about conference logistics should contact Ms. Bonnie Miller at SIU-C Law School (bmiller@siu.edu; 618-453-8730).

Stephen L. Wasby
Professor Emeritus, University at Albany

Call for Papers - Law & Society Associations

The combined 2008 annual meetings of the Law and Society Association and the Canadian Law and Society Association are scheduled for Thursday, May 29 through Sunday, June 1 in Montreal. The deadline for paper proposals is December 12th.

"The theme for this meeting signals that law is rooted in places — from families and villages to the global economy — and that law has the power to place and displace people in space, time, and relationships. We invite papers and encourage multi-disciplinary scholarship that reflect on the many dimensions of law, place, and power."

More information can be found here.

Conference on the Presidency and the Supreme Court

On November 11th and 12th, the Franklin D. Roosevelt Presidential Library and Museum (New York) will host a conference on The Presidency and the Supreme Court. The speakers are numerous and distinguished. George H. W. Bush will start things off; Justice O'Connor will deliver the keynote address.

CELS Conference Paper Selections & Tentative Schedule

For anyone interested, a tentative CELS conference schedule is available at the CELS Conference website (this year hosted at NYU and found here).  Individual paper discussant assignments will be made, and posted, promptly.

Empirical Legal Studies panel at SEALS Conference

Today, I have the privilege to being on a panel at the Southeastern Association of Law Schools annual meeting, entitled "The 'Ins' and 'Outs' of Empirical Research."  The panel was put together by Benjamin Barton (Tennessee), and I am splitting time with Stefanie Lindquist (Vanderbilt) and Ahmed Taha (Wake Forest).

As I was preparing for my talk, I realized that I was the only presenter who did not have a PhD -- and I am going last on the program.  I plan on stealing the show with my topic, "Empiricism for the Non-PhD Law Professor"-- something that is likely to resonant with 90 percent of the audience.  I am building on some of the themes set forth in my April 2006 post, ELS on the Cheap (i.e., without Graduate School).

The SEALS sessions tend to be large (even discounting for my participation on the program), so I am posting two handouts here in the event we run short:

1. Useful Reference Texts on Statistical Analysis ... on my bookshelf [here]
2. Sources of External Funding (SUNY Buffalo Law) [here]

Call for Student Papers - Interdisciplinary Submissions Encouraged

The deadline to submit abstracts for The Student “I”  conference is fast approaching. Some details:

Graduate and undergraduate students from all disciplines are invited to submit an abstract for The Student “I”, a student conference on October 25, 2007 at the Faculty of Law, University of Ottawa, Canada.

Preceding the Revealed “I” conference hosted by researchers from On the Identity Trail, this day long student conference brings together students from around the world, selected through a peer-review process, to present research relating to identity, privacy, anonymity, technology, surveillance, and other related topics engaged by the On the Identity Trail project.

Abstracts should not exceed 1,000 words (including notes and citations). Successful abstracts will seek to make an original contribution. Inter-disciplinary submissions are encouraged. Abstracts should be accompanied with a short bio, which should include the student’s program and institution of study, and an email address for correspondence. The deadline for abstracts is July 1, 2007.

More information can be found here.

CELS Deadline Extended

Second Annual Conference on Empirical Legal Studies

New York University Law School

http://www.law.nyu.edu/cels

9-10 November 2007

Announcement & Call for Papers

Submission Deadline Extended to July 5, 2007

http://hq.ssrn.com/conference=CELS-2007

Conference: American Psychology/Law Society

The annual conference of the American Psychology/Law Society will be held on March 5-8, 2008, in Jacksonville, FL.  Announcement here; call for papers (Sept. 21 deadline) should be posted soon.  This year's conference (July 3-8, 2007) is being held in Adelaide, Australia, in conjunction with the European Association of Psychology & Law and the Australian and New Zealand Association of Psychiatry, Psychology and Law.

The APLS conference is a great opportunity for ELS scholars, as the presentations tend to be heavily in certain areas of psychology, and law school academics are often under-represented.  It's also a great way to build interdisciplinary connections.

Empirical Work on Property Issues (Blumenthal Guest)

The variety of topics to which ELS can profitably be applied--as shown, for instance, by the recent AALS conference and by the successful ELS conferences--is, of course, both encouraging and daunting.  As one perhaps atypical example, a month or so ago there was an interesting exchange on the PropertyProfs listserv, looking for examples of empirical legal articles examining property issues.  I am certain there are more than the ones identified, as this request focused on real property--and I hope readers might identify more, please!--but the ones that were mentioned are excellent examples of the sort of useful ELS work that can be done.  Thus, in no particular order, here are the ones mentioned:

• Joyce Palomar, The War Between Attorneys and Lay Conveyancers--Empirical Evidence Says "Cease Fire!", 31 Conn. L. Rev. 423 (1999)
• N. William Hines, Real Property Joint Tenancies: Law, Fact, and Fancy, 51 Iowa L. Rev. 582 (1966)
• N. William Hines, Personal Property Joint Tenancies: More Law, Fact, and Fancy, 54 Minn. L. Rev. 509 (1970)
• Michael H. Schill et al., The Condominium v. Cooperative Puzzle: An Empirical Analysis of Housing in New York City, available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=502362
• Vicki Been & Ioan Voicu, The Effect of Community Gardens on Neighboring Property Values, available at SSRN: http:ssrn.com/abstract=889113
• Dean Lueck & Jeffrey A. Michael, Preemptive Habitat Destruction Under the Endangered Species Act, 46 J. L. & Econ. 27 (2003)
• Nicole Stelle Garnett, The Neglected Political Economy of Eminent Domain, 105 Mich. L. Rev. 101 (2006)
• Ann E. Carlson & Daniel Pollak, Takings on the Ground: How the Supreme Court's Takings Jurisprudence Affects Local Land Use Decisions, 35 U.C. Davis L. Rev. (2001)
• Leigh L. Linden & Jonah E. Rockoff, There Goes the Neighborhood? Estimates of the Impact of Crime Risk on Property Values from Megan's Laws, NBER Working Paper No.W12253 (2006)
• Robert Ellickson, Order Without Law (1991)
• Ward Farnsworth, Do Parties to Nuisance Cases Bargain After Judgment?: A Glimpse Inside the Cathedral, 66 Chi. L. Rev. 373 (1999)
• Mark D. West, Losers: Recovering Lost Property in Japan and the United States, 37 Law & Soc. Rev. 369 (2003)
• Robert H. Sitkoff & Max M. Schanzenbach, Jurisdictional Competition for Trust Funds: An Empirical Analysis of Perpetuities and Taxes, 115 Yale L.J. 356 (2005)
• Max M. Schanzenbach & Robert H. Sitkoff, Perpetuities or Taxes? Explaining the Rise of the Perpetual Trust, 27 Cardozo L. Rev. (2006)
• Lior Strahilevitz, How Changes in Property Regimes Influence Social Norms: Commodifying California's Carpool Lanes, 75 Ind. L.J. 1231 (2000)
• Lior Strahilevitz, Exclusionary Amenities in Residential Communities, 92 Va. L. Rev. 437 (2006).

Second Annual Conference on Empirical Legal Studies

Second Annual Conference on Empirical Legal Studies

New York University Law School

http://www.law.nyu.edu/cels

9-10 November 2007

Second Announcement & Call for Papers

 

Submission Deadline July 1, 2007

http://hq.ssrn.com/conference=CELS-2007

 

The Second Annual Conference on Empirical Legal Studies will be held at New York University School of Law in New York. The conference will feature original empirical and experimental legal scholarship by leading scholars from a diverse range of fields. 

 

Last year’s conference had approximately 230 participants and more than 85 presented papers. We expect that this year’s conference will be at least as large.

 

The conference will start at 9:00 a.m. on Friday November 9, 2007. Paper presentations will conclude at 1:15 p.m. on Saturday November 10 in order to allow participants to return home that afternoon. For those staying on, there will be two methodology discussion sessions (one introductory and one advanced) from 2:30 to 4:00 p.m. and a reception from 6:00 to 8:00 p.m. on Saturday.

 

The deadline for submission of papers is July 1, 2007. Details about submissions are included below.

 

There is a conference fee of $60 ($30 for students). This fee covers all activities including meals and refreshments. It also covers a one-year membership in the Society for Empirical Legal Studies (SELS) as well as a one-year subscription to the Journal of Empirical Legal Studies (JELS) (students paying the discounted fee will receive only the on-line version).  Given the size of the conference, we cannot reimburse expenses (except for some presenters with special needs, as discussed below).

 

Scholars whose papers are accepted for presentation at the conference will be invited (but not required) to submit the work for possible publication in JELS. In addition, the JELS editors expect to publish abstracts of all presented papers (including poster session papers) in the special issue (with author consent).

The 'New' Media: Bloggers and the Courts

Today, at the Seventh Circuit Bench-Bar Conference, I was on a panel entitled "The 'New' Media:  Bloggers and the Courts."  My fellow panelists included Christine Hurt, Ann Althouse, Howard Bashman, Rick Garnett, and Eugene Volokh.  The Honorable Diane Sykes of the Seventh Circuit moderated our panel.  (Needless to say, I was very pleased to be included on a panel with such distinguished colleagues.)  Before our panel, Supreme Court reporter Joan Biskupic of USA Today discussed "The Evolution of Media Coverage on the Supreme Court" and there was a panel discussion entitled "Traditional Media' s Coverage of the Supreme Court." 

Some items struck me about this entire morning devoted to essentially media, technology, and the law.  First, blogs and the internet are having a major impact on "traditional media."  It's clear that, to keep up with the bloggers, the way of doing business has changed for reporters (e.g., blogs of their own, quicker deadlines, articles of different substance).  Second, the availability of electronic information such as The Oyez Project and SSRN (and any of the other databases we link to on the ELS Blog) are, unfortunately, not widely known.  Third, there is a gross disparity among individuals in understanding what blogs are and what they do.  Fourth, many consider blogs to have a unique influence on the public discourse and possibly the courts.  Yet, some attendees were concerned that bloggers posting about pending cases may be inappropriate.  Fifth, the ELS Blog was described as more "academic in nature" than most other legal blogs, serving as a forum "for high-level exchanges of commentary on law and legal scholarship."  I think this was in response to our advanced content level and lack of posts regarding gossip or popular culture.

Finally, the best quote of the day belongs to Ann Althouse:  "Judges can't write a really bloggy blog."

For my co-panelists' take, see here and here (though it sounds like more details from them are forthcoming).

LSA Preliminary Program Now Available...

...see here.

Blumenthal # 2 - A Plea for Psychology (with apologies to John Austin)

A Plea for Psychology (with apologies to J.L. Austin)

So I've gotten off to a slow start, but I'll try to make some contribution now.

As I mentioned, I wonder if psychology as a discipline has gotten short shrift from ELS. As a historical matter I think so; research in legal psychology has been conducted, off and on, for about 100 years. But until recently the legal system has been skeptical, suspicious, at times hostile to psychology, and there’s not much discussion of psychological research in modern ELS – with exceptions, much of the work stems from economics or political science.

There are historical reasons for this skepticism. The conventional story is that psychology and law as a discipline was founded around 1908, with the publication of Hugo Munsterberg’s On the Witness Stand, documenting his efforts to persuade the legal system that his empirical work in criminal justice – eyewitness research, memory, perception, lie-detection, etc. – was relevant and important. (Another interesting contribution, written in a more scholarly vein, was a book by G.F. Arnold, a British legal scholar, Psychology Applied to Legal Evidence (1906)).

Munsterberg's book was pugnacious and had a lot of 'tude -- probably too much ("The time for Applied Psychology is surely near. . . .  The lawyer alone is obdurate;" "The lawyer and the judge and the juryman are sure that they do not need the experimental psychologist. . . .  They go on thinking that their legal instinct and their common sense supplies them with all that is needed and somewhat more.")  Hugo's book prompted a now-classic response article by John Henry Wigmore, in which Wigmore staged a mock lawsuit accusing Munsterberg of libeling the legal profession.  Both tongue-in-cheek and vitriolic, Wigmore's cross-examination devastated poor Hugo, and as a result, one commentator has said, for years American psychologists "left the law rather severely alone."  Last week a wonderful conference was staged at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, though, celebrating OTWS's centenary: Off the Witness Stand: Using Psychology in the Practice of Justice."  With a keynote speech by Janet Reno, and talks by many top researchers in in psychology discussing the state of psycholegal research today--experts in eyewitness testimony, memory, jury decision-making, forensic psychology, coerced confessions, and more--it was geared toward both scholars and practitioners, and was a good state-of-the-discipline weekend.  (One concern, as I hope to discuss in another post, is the impression that criminal justice is all there is for psychology to look at.)

And there are methodological / institutional reasons for the skepticism.  As I and many others have noted, experimental psychology takes a different approach to finding answers: objective rather than adversarial, nomothetic rather than idiographic, probabilistic rather than certain, descriptive rather than prescriptive.

But this skepticism is unfortunate, and has led to a lack of communication between the disciplines of law and psychology.  I think ELS suffers from that lack, in at least two ways.  The first is simply mutual unfamiliarity with the other field’s research.  This is unfortunate historically (for instance, the explosion of heuristics-and-biases research over the last 10 years or so, which builds on psychologists’ work that has been around for 30 years and appears in any introductory cognitive psychology textbook), but also in terms of keeping up with empirical developments in psychology (and other social sciences too, of course).

*

The second, which I'll turn to next post, is methodological. . . .

*

For those who are still here, thanks!