The Use and Incorporation of Extralegal Insights in Legal Reasoning

Giesen, I.

doi:10.18352/ulr.308

Cited by 9 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Given that this study was conducted to help address concerns from the child welfare perspective, sharing and interpreting these results for court actors would also be helpful (e.g., Giesen, 2015). These findings may aid not only in increasing understanding among both juvenile court and child welfare systems regarding best ways to serve youth with behavioral problems but also in identifying common ground between sometimes competing perspectives.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Who’s Been Served and How?

Orsi

Lee

Winokur

et al. 2017

Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Child welfare systems were created to protect maltreated children. However, adolescents today can be involved with child welfare for reasons other than maltreatment, including behavior issues. Such youth are also commonly involved in the youth corrections system. This study examines youth characteristics and risk factors which predict attaining permanency at case closure for youth involved in child welfare primarily for behavioral reasons. The sample consists of 5,691 youth aged 10-17 served in Colorado between 2007 and 2013. A multinomial logit model identified predictors of nonpermanent outcomes and of placement with return home, compared to remaining home throughout case involvement. Results show that the following characteristics and risks have a positive relationship with nonpermanent outcomes: longer case duration, prior child welfare placement, felony involvement, crimes against persons or property, truancy, running away, and gang membership. Services provided by the child welfare system are negatively related to nonpermanent outcomes.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Who’s Been Served and How?

Orsi

Lee

Winokur

et al. 2017

Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…psychological) insights to normative legal conclusions'. 27 This question refers to the stage during which a legal researcher, who has studied both traditional sources of legal research and the results of studies from other disciplines, has to answer the normative central research question. 28 Here Giesen's questions come to the fore: what role do the results, taken from the other disciplines, play at this stage?…”

Section: Legal Studies and Insights From Other Disciplinesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Victim’s Right to Intervene as an Injured Party in Criminal Proceedings: A Multidimensional and Interdisciplinary Assessment of Current Dutch Legal Practice

Kool¹,

Emaus²,

Uhm³

2017

ULR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

to place the results from legal and non-legal studies in the right context. As we will explain, our position with regard to the mixed methods debate is a 'mixed one'. We do not claim to have an answer to the methodological issue of whether the use of mixed methods amounts to a 'third methodology'; our aim is solely to provide a description of our use of a mixed methods approach (Section 3). 5 After this we will describe our case: researching the victim's right to intervene as an injured party in Dutch legal practice. By referring to the research design and results we will also illustrate how triangulation may work in practice (Sections 4 to 9). To conclude, we will explain why this research endorses the fact that triangulation is an appropriate approach for our interdisciplinary assessment of Dutch legal practice. We will explain the opportunities and difficulties that we encountered throughout the research and that may be helpful for others who may want to embark on a similar interdisciplinary study (Section 10). We do wish to add a 'disclaimer', however. Our aim is to report on 'the lessons learned', not to provide an extensive report on how to intensively integrate results from social and legal sciences. 5 With regard to this debate see: J.W. Cresswell, Designing and conducting mixed methods research (2010). Creswell opts for the use of mixed methods as an 'approach' (pp. 5-7). Applying the term 'methodology' would imply a consolidation of the underlying philosophical assumptions with regard to the application of the methods. In our opinion, notwithstanding the current developments, the state of the art within legal empirical studies cannot validate such a high-level qualification.

show abstract

“…An interesting question, however, is what the implications should be if there were important discrepancies in this regard (see also Giesen, 2015). Not many lawyers would argue that, if the law contained standards of procedural justice that do not or only very slightly shape defendants' perceptions of procedural fairness, those standards should be discarded.…”

Section: A Matter Of Translationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This makes it difficult to base normative conclusions on a single study, or at least not without many words of caution. Rather, multiple studies that preferably use different types of methods and examine different contexts are needed to provide an empirical basis that is sufficiently robust (see also Giesen, 2015;Robbennolt, 2002). For instance, Van den Berghe (2020) points to different problems with the available economic evidence in the context of competition law, as a result of which empirical evidence does not automatically lead to legal improvements.…”

Section: Being Aware Of the Gapmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…How to get from empirical findings to normative conclusions about what should be done with them? Within the context of empirical legal research, some authors have examined this issue (e.g., Bouwman, 2020;Giesen, 2015;Leeuw, 2015). Here, I suggest that the translation of empirical findings into normative conclusions needs to be (1) explicit and (2) underpinned by arguments.…”

Section: Bridging the Gapmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Procedural Justice on Trial

Ansems¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Author contributions: Lisa Ansems designed the study, including the topic list and the study's procedures, co-organized approval by the court, organized and liaised about ongoing data collection within the court, collected the data, analyzed the data, interpreted results, presented and reported the results to the court, and wrote the manuscript. Kees van den Bos provided conceptualization and theoretical input and aided in designing the study and topic list, co-organized approval by the court, provided conceptualization and theory used to integrate findings, co-interpreted results, and edited the manuscript. Elaine Mak provided input for the design and set-up of the study and commented on several drafts of the manuscript, including editing of the manuscript.

show abstract

The Use and Incorporation of Extralegal Insights in Legal Reasoning

Cited by 9 publications

References 1 publication

Who’s Been Served and How?

Who’s Been Served and How?

The Victim’s Right to Intervene as an Injured Party in Criminal Proceedings: A Multidimensional and Interdisciplinary Assessment of Current Dutch Legal Practice

Procedural Justice on Trial

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About