Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-r6c6k Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-10T18:56:28.360Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Observing Supreme Court Oral Argument: A Biosocial Approach

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 May 2016

James N. Schubert ,
Steven A. Peterson ,
Glendon Schubert  and
Stephen Wasby
James N. Schubert
Affiliation:
Northern Illinois University, USA
Steven A. Peterson
Affiliation:
Alfred University, USA
Glendon Schubert
Affiliation:
University of Hawaii/Southern Illinois University, USA
Stephen Wasby
Affiliation:
State University of New York at Albany, USA

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the 'Save PDF' action button.

Supreme Court oral argument (OA) is one of many face-to-face settings of political interaction. This article describes a methodology for the systematic observation and measurement of behavior in OA developed in a study of over 300 randomly selected cases from the 1969-1981 terms of the U.S. Supreme Court. Five sources of observation are integrated into the OA database at the speaking turn level of analysis: the actual text of verbal behavior; categorical behavior codes; aspects of language use and speech behavior events; electro-acoustical measurement of voice quality; and content analysis of subject matter. Preliminary data are presented to illustrate the methodology and its application to theoretical concerns of the research project.

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Politics and the Life Sciences , Volume 11 , Issue 1 , February 1992 , pp. 35 - 52
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Politics and the Life Sciences 

References

Baken, R. J.(1987). Clinical Measurement of Speech and Voice. Boston, Mass.: Little, Brown and Company.Google Scholar
Bales, Robert F.(1950). Interaction Process Analysis. Ann Arbor: University Microfilms.Google Scholar
Barber, J. D.(1966). Power in Committees: An Experimental Study in the Government Process. Chicago: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
Barner-Barry, C.(1986). “An Introduction to Nonparticipant Observational Research Techniques.” Politics and the Life Sciences 5:139–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brenner, S.(1980). “Fluidity on the United States Supreme Court: A Reexamination.” American Journal of Political Science 24:526–535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brenner, S.and Spaeth, H. J.(1986). “Issue Specialization in Majority Opinion Assignment on the Burger Court.” Western Political Quarterly 39:520–527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chapper, J.(1983). “Oral Argument and Expediting Appeals.” Journal of Legal Reform 16:517–526.Google Scholar
Dorff, R. H.and Steiner, J.(1981). “Political Decision Making in Face-to-Face Groups: Theory, Methods, and an Empirical Application in Switzerland.” American Political Science Review 75:368–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fenno, R. F.(1986). “Observation, Context, and Sequence in the Study of Politics.” American Political Science Review 80:3–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frank, R. S.(1977). “Nonverbal and Paralinguistic Analysis of Political Behavior: The McGovern-Humphrey California Primary Debate.” In Hermann, M., ed. A Psychological Examination of Political Leaders. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Goldman, S.(1969). “Backgrounds, Attitudes, and the Voting Behavior of Judges: A Comment on Joel Grossman's Social Background and Judicial Decisions.” Journal of Politics 31:214–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gray, J. A.(1982). The Neuropsychology of Anxiety: An Enquiry into the Functions of the Septo-Hippocampal System. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Harlan, J. M. Jr.(1955). “The Role of Oral Argument.” Cornell Law Review 41:6.Google Scholar
Hermann, M.(1977). “Verbal Behavior of Negotiators in Periods of High and Low Stress: The 1965-66 New York City Transit Negotiations.” In Hermann, M., ed. A Psychological Examination of Political Leaders. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Howard, J. W.(1968). “On the Fluidity of Judicial Choice.” American Political Science Review 62:43–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howard, J. W.(1981). Courts of Appeals in the Federal Judicial System. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marcus, G. E.(1988). “The Structure of Emotional Responses: 1984 Presidential Candidates.” American Political Science Review 82:737–762.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mazur, A.and Cataldo, M.(1989). “Dominance and Deference in Conversation.” Journal of Social and Biological Structures 12:87–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McFeeley, N. D.and Ault, R. J.(1979). “Supreme Court Oral Argument.” Jurimetrics Journal 20:52–84.Google Scholar
Murphy, W. F.(1966). “Courts as Small Groups.” Harvard Law Review 79:1565–1572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nardulli, P. F., Flemming, R. B., and Eisenstein, J.(1984). “Unraveling the Complexities of Decision Making in Face-to-Face Groups: A Contextual Analysis of Plea-Bargained Sentences.” American Political Science Review 78:912–927.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
New York Times (1989). “Transcript of Arguments Before High Court on Abortion Case.” B12(April 27).Google Scholar
Peterson, S. A., Wasby, S., Schubert, G., and Schubert, J.(1991). “Patterns in Supreme Court Oral Argument.” NSF Oral Argument Project Paper No. 6. Paper presented at the meeting of Law and Society Association, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Scherer, K. R.(1986). “Vocal Affect Expression.” Psychological Bulletin 99:143–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schubert, G.(1974). The Judicial Mind Revisited. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Schubert, G.(1985). Political Culture and Judicial Behavior, Volume II. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.Google Scholar
Schubert, G.and Masters, R. D., eds. (1991). Primate Politics. Carbondale, III.: Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
Schubert, G., Peterson, S., Wasby, S., and Schubert, J.(1991a). “Justices' Participation in Supreme Court Oral Argument.” NSF Oral Argument Project Paper No. 3. Paper presented to the annual meeting of the Western Political Science Association, Seattle.Google Scholar
Schubert, G., Peterson, S., Wasby, S., and Schubert, J.(1991b). “Patterns of Oral Argument and Case Outcomes in the Supreme Court: 1969 and 1970 Terms.” NSF Oral Argument Project Paper No. 9. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington.Google Scholar
Schubert, J. N.(1983). “Ethological Methods for Observing Small Group Political Decision Making.” Politics and the Life Sciences 2:3–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schubert, J. N.(1987). “Judicial Behavior in Oral Argument: A Psycholinguistic Analysis.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago.Google Scholar
Schubert, J. N.(1988). “Politics under the Microscope: Observational Methods in Political Research.” International Political Science Review 9:335–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schubert, J. N.(1990). “Oral Argument and Size of Majority in Supreme Court Decision Making.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the New York State Political Science Association, Albany.Google Scholar
Schubert, J. N., Peterson, S., Wasby, S., and Schubert, G.(1991a). “Descensus and Unanimity in Supreme Court Decision Making.” NSF Oral Argument Project Paper No. 9. Paper presented at the World Congress of the International Political Science Association, Buenos Aires.Google Scholar
Schubert, J. N., Peterson, S., Wasby, S., and Schubert, G.(1991b). “Judicial Involvement and Leadership in Oral Argument.” NSF Oral Argument Project Paper No. 7. Paper presented at the meeting of the International Society for Political Psychology, Helsinki.Google Scholar
Schwartz, B.(1985). The Unpublished Opinions of the Warren Court. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Schwartz, B.(1988). The Unpublished Opinions of the Burger Court. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Shapiro, S. M.(1984). “Oral Argument in the Supreme Court of the United States.” Catholic University Law Review 33:529–553.Google Scholar
Siegman, A. W.(1978). “The Tell-Tale Voice: Nonverbal Messages of Verbal Communication.” In Siegman, A. W.and Feldstein, S., eds. Nonverbal Behavior and Communication. New York: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
Spaeth, H. J.(1991). United States Supreme Court Judicial Data Base, 1953-1989 Terms. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research.Google Scholar
Ulmer, S. S.(1981). “Leadership and Group Structure.” In Sidney Ulmer, S.(ed.), Courts, Law and Judicial Processes. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Wahlke, J.C.(1979). “Pre-Behavioralism in Political Science” American Political Science Review 73:9–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wasby, S. L.(1981). “Oral Argument in the Ninth Circuit.” Golden Gate Law Review 11:21–79.Google Scholar
Wasby, S. L.(1982). “The Function and Importance of Appellate Oral Argument.” Judicature 65:340–353.Google Scholar
Wasby, S. L., D'Amato, A. A., and Metrailer, R.(1976). “The Functions of Oral Argument in the U.S. Supreme Court.” Quarterly Journal of Speech 62:410–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wasby, S. L., Peterson, S., Schubert, G., and Schubert, J.(1991). “The Supreme Court's Use of Per Curiam Dispositions: The Connection to Oral Argument.” NSF Oral Argument Project Paper No. 5. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago.Google Scholar
Watson, G.and Stookey, J.(1988). “Supreme Court Confirmation Hearings: A View from the Senate.” Judicature 71:186–196.Google Scholar
Watts, M. W.(1981). “Individual Differences in Skin Conductance Response to Vicariously Modeled Violence and Pathos.” New Directions for Methodology of Social and Behavioral Science 7:81–87.Google Scholar