skip navigation


Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.


NCJ Number: 122354 Find in a Library
Title: Strategies for Judicial Research: Soaking and Poking in the Judiciary: Interviewing U.S. Supreme Court Justices and Interest Group Attorneys
Journal: Judicature  Volume:73  Issue:4  Dated:(December-January 1990)  Pages:196-198
Author(s): L Epstein
Date Published: 1990
Page Count: 3
Type: Issue Overview
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: While the interview format is often considered to elicit "soft" data, judicial researchers conclude that intensive, elite, unscheduled interviews with Supreme Court justices and interest group attorneys can yield exploratory and supplementary data and can function as a main research tool.
Abstract: Interviews often yield data enabling scholars to develop hypotheses for future analysis. Interviews can also elicit material that supplements, confirms, validates, or invalidates data obtained elsewhere. Intensive interviews can also be carefully structured to function as main tools for research, for sometimes the origins of significant political decisions are known to only a few people. Interviews can function as interactive observations similar to those espoused by Charles Fenno. When studying political decisions made by a small group of decisionmakers, interviewing those individuals can be an important element in discerning how the political process works and how political decisions are made. 19 footnotes.
Main Term(s): Judicial attitudes
Index Term(s): Behavioral science research; Judicial decisions; Personal interviews
To cite this abstract, use the following link:

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.