Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-x24gv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-30T22:33:18.429Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Tables

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 March 2022

Ethan Michelson
Ethan Michelson
Affiliation:
Indiana University, Bloomington

Summary

A summary is not available for this content. As you have access to this content, full HTML content is provided on this page. A PDF of this content is also available in through the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Type
Chapter
Information
Decoupling
Gender Injustice in China's Divorce Courts
 , pp. x - xii
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2022
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This content is Open Access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 https://creativecommons.org/cclicenses/

Tables

  1. 4.1Distributions of cases, courts, and populations

  2. 4.2Representation of online divorce cases, first-instance adjudications

  3. 6.1Correlates of annual court case volume (1,000s of closed cases), unstandardized linear regression coefficients

  4. 6.2Correlates of judge population, unstandardized linear regression coefficients

  5. 6.3Correlates of cases per judge, unstandardized linear regression coefficients

  6. 6.4Correlates of percentage of divorces granted (of adjudicated divorce petitions), unstandardized linear regression coefficients

  7. 6.5Application of the simplified procedure and plaintiff win rates by case type, first-instance adjudications

  8. 6.6Time to decision (mean/median days) by case type, first-instance civil adjudications

  9. 6.7Length of written decisions (mean/median characters) by case type, first-instance civil adjudications

  10. 6.8Female litigants by case type, first-instance adjudications

  11. 7.1Proportion of plaintiffs’ petitions and judges’ holdings (%)containing domestic violence language

  12. 8.1Unique Chinese words in word clouds

  13. 8.2Typology of judicial discourse in holdings to deny divorce petitions

  14. 8.3Proportion of judges’ holdings (%) containing types of words, by plaintiff claim of domestic violence

  15. 8.4Proportion of judges’ holdings (%) containing types of words, by plaintiff sex and outcome

  16. 8.5Average marginal effects on the appearance of word types in judges’ holdings, calculated from logistic regression models

  17. 8.6Frequency distributions (%) of main variables in regression models

  18. 8.7Average marginal effects on adjudicated denials, calculated from logistic regression models

  19. 8.8Average predicted probabilities of adjudicated denials

  20. 9.1Proportion of plaintiffs (%) granted divorce, by number of attempts until divorce granted

  21. 9.2Proportion of plaintiffs (%) granted divorce, by duration of time from initial filing to granted divorce

  22. 9.3Correlates of time (days) from initial filing to granted divorce, unstandardized linear regression coefficients (means)/quantile regression coefficients (medians)

  23. 11.1Frequency distributions (%) of main variables in regression models

  24. 11.2Average marginal effects on receiving child custody, rural courts, calculated from logistic regression models

  25. 11.3Average marginal effects on receiving child custody, urban courts, calculated from logistic regression models

  26. 11.4Proportion of litigants (%) requesting child custody

  27. 11.5Proportion of litigants (%) with physical possession of a child

  28. 11.6Proportion of couples (%) with children of various sex compositions

  29. 11.7Proportion of litigants (%) awarded child custody

  30. 11.8Proportion of litigants (%) awarded custody of daughters and sons

  31. 11.9Average predicted probabilities of courts’ granting child custody

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

  • Tables
  • Ethan Michelson, Indiana University, Bloomington
  • Book: Decoupling
  • Online publication: 24 March 2022
Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

  • Tables
  • Ethan Michelson, Indiana University, Bloomington
  • Book: Decoupling
  • Online publication: 24 March 2022
Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

  • Tables
  • Ethan Michelson, Indiana University, Bloomington
  • Book: Decoupling
  • Online publication: 24 March 2022
Available formats
×