Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Dedication
- Contents
- List of Figures
- List of Tables
- Acknowledgments
- 1 Who They Are and What They Want
- 2 Goals and Personality
- 3 Measuring Justice Personality
- 4 Agenda Setting
- 5 Opinion Assignments
- 6 Intra-Court Bargaining
- 7 Voting on the Merits
- 8 Separate Opinions
- 9 Behind the Black Robes
- Appendix A Agenda-Setting Analysis
- Appendix B Opinion Assignment Analysis
- Appendix C Intra-Court Bargaining Analysis
- Appendix D Voting on the Merits Analysis
- Appendix E Separate Opinion Analysis
- Notes
- Index
Appendix D - Voting on the Merits Analysis
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 22 August 2018
- Frontmatter
- Dedication
- Contents
- List of Figures
- List of Tables
- Acknowledgments
- 1 Who They Are and What They Want
- 2 Goals and Personality
- 3 Measuring Justice Personality
- 4 Agenda Setting
- 5 Opinion Assignments
- 6 Intra-Court Bargaining
- 7 Voting on the Merits
- 8 Separate Opinions
- 9 Behind the Black Robes
- Appendix A Agenda-Setting Analysis
- Appendix B Opinion Assignment Analysis
- Appendix C Intra-Court Bargaining Analysis
- Appendix D Voting on the Merits Analysis
- Appendix E Separate Opinion Analysis
- Notes
- Index
Summary
Table D.1 reports the results of the dissent model. The data consist of votes on the merits by 34 justices in 6,222 cases during the 1951 through 2013 terms. Unless noted otherwise, the data were obtained from the Supreme Court Database. The dependent variable is each justice's vote on the merits in each case (1 = dissent, 0 = vote with majority; N = 49, 001). Because the dependent variable is dichotomous and dissents by the same justice may be interdependent, I employ a multilevel logistic regression model with random intercepts for justice. The model includes the justices’ SCIPEs for the Big Five (Extraversion, Conscientiousness, Agreeableness, Neuroticism, and Openness), the SCIPEs for the majority opinion author (OA Extraversion, OA Conscientiousness, OA Agreeableness, OA Neuroticism, and OA Openness), and the following control variables and interaction terms:
• The public's ideological disagreement with the direction of the Court's ruling (Public Disagreement), measured as the Stimson Public Mood if the Court issued a conservative ruling and the inverted Stimson Public Mood if the Court issued a liberal ruling.
• The Clark, Lax, and Rice measure of latent case salience, which is based on pre-decision case coverage in three leading newspapers: the New York Times, the Washington Post, and the Los Angeles Times, as well as a three-way interaction term between this variable, Public Disagreement, and Extraversion (and the constituent two-way interactions).
• Each justice's ideological disagreement with the direction of the Court's ruling (Justice Disagreement), measured as the justice's Segal–Cover ideology score if the Court issued a liberal ruling and the inverted Segal–Cover score if the Court issued a conservative ruling, as well as an interaction term between this variable and Conscientiousness.
• Dichotomous indicators taking on the value one for cases with 1Other Dissent, 2 Other Dissents, and 3 Other Dissents (zero otherwise), as well as interaction terms between each of these indicators and Agreeableness.
• A dichotomous indicator taking on the value one if the Court issued a liberal ruling and zero otherwise (Liberal Ruling), as well as an interaction term between this variable and Agreeableness.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- What Justices WantGoals and Personality on the U.S. Supreme Court, pp. 167 - 170Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2018