Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-qsmjn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T12:07:43.977Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Scale Fitting in the Psychometric Model of Judicial Decision Making*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

David John Gow
David John Gow*
Affiliation:
Rice University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The psychometric model, developed by Glendon Schubert, is a widely accepted way of conceptualizing judicial decision making. It entails the representation of justices' ideal points in a multidimensional space. A vector (representing the ordering of the justices derived from scalogram analysis) is projected through this space to aid in interpreting the underlying attitudinal dimensions of interagreement. Despite the apparent rigor of this model it contains certain indeterminacies, as no mathematical procedure has been used to determine the location of the scale vectors. Consequently ad hoc. hand procedures which may yield suboptimal solutions have been developed.

This article provides solutions for the problem of fitting scale vectors to multidimensional configurations. These solutions are developed for the problem where the scale analogue is treated at the measurement level of interval or ordinal values. In order to demonstrate the advantages of using these procedures, we undertake a reanalysis of Schubert's results (for which he used ad hoc procedures). In one-half of the cases analyzed, the results reported by Schubert are suboptimal when evaluated in terms of the coefficient he sought to maximize. The mathematical solutions and the associated computer programs give greater rigor to the psychometric model and provide a response to the criticism that scale fitting in the psychometric model is subjective and inconsistent with the premises of the behavioral approach to judicial decision making.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 73 , Issue 2 , June 1979 , pp. 430 - 441
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1979

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

For their detailed comments on an earlier draft of this article I would like to thank A. R. Blackshield (University of New South Wales), Fred Kort (University of Connecticut) and Edward J. Schneider (University of Michigan). I would also like to record my intellectual debt to Glendon Schubert of the University of Hawaii.

References

Blackshield, A. R. (1972). “Quantitative Analysis: The High Court of Australia, 1964–1969.” Lawasia 3: 1–66.Google Scholar
Browne, Michael W. (1967). “On Oblique Procrustes Rotation.” Psychometrika 32: 125–32.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chang, J. J. and Carroll, J. Douglas (1969). “How to Use PRØFIT, a computer program for property fitting by optimizing nonlinear or linear correlation.” (Unpublished paper, Bell Telephone Laboratories, Murray Hill, N.J.).Google Scholar
Coombs, Clyde H. (1964). A Theory of Data. New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Coombs, Clyde H. and Kao, Richard C. (1960). “On a Connection Between Factor Analysis and Multidimensional Unfolding.” Psychometrika 25: 219–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cramer, Elliot M. (1974). “On Browne's Solution for Oblique Procrustes Rotation.” Psychometrika 39: 159–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Leeuw, Jan, Young, Forrest W. and Takane, Yoshio (1976). “Additive Structure in Qualitative Data: An Alternating Least Squares Method with Optimal Scaling Features.” Psychometrika 41: 471–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flango, Victor E. and Ducat, Craig (1977). “Toward an Integration of Public Law and Judicial Behavior.” Journal of Politics 39: 41–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldman, Sheldon and Jahnige, Thomas (1976). The Federal Courts as a Political System. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Guttman, Louis (1944). “A Basis for Scaling Qualitative Data.” American Sociological Review 9: 139–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guttman, Louis (1968). “A General Nonmetric Technique for Finding the Smallest Coordinate Space for a Configuration of Points.” Psychometrika 33: 469–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Handberg, Roger H. (1976). “Decision-making in a Natural Court, 1916–1921.” American Politics Quarterly 4: 357–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harman, Harry H. (1976). Modern Factor Analysis, 3rd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Korth, Bruce and Tucker, Ledyard R. (1976). “Procrustes Matching by Congruence Coefficients.” Psychometrika 41: 531–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kruskal, Joseph B. (1964). “Nonmetric Multidimensional Scaling: A Numerical Method.” Psychometrika 29: 115–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kruskal, Joseph B. and Wish, M. (1978). Multidimensional Scaling. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lingoes, James C. ed. (1977). Geometric Representations of Relational Data: Readings in Multidimensional Scaling. Ann Arbor, Mich.: Mathesis Press.Google Scholar
Lingoes, James C. and Roskam, Edward E. (1973). “A Mathematical and Empirical Analysis of Two Multidimensional Scaling Algorithms.” Psychometrika Monograph Supplement 38: Pt. 2 (entire issue).Google Scholar
Rabinowitz, George B. (1975). “An Introduction to Nonmetric Multidimensional Scaling.” American Journal of Political Science 19: 343–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ryan, J. P. and Tate, C. Neal (1975). The Supreme Court in American Politics: Policy Through Law. Washington, D.C.: American Political Science Association.Google Scholar
Schubert, Glendon (1961). “A Psychometric Model of the Supreme Court.” American Behavioral Scientist 5: 14–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schubert, Glendon (1962). “A Solution to the Indeterminate Factorial Resolution of Thurstone and Degan's Study of the Supreme Court.” Behavioral Science 7: 448–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schubert, Glendon (1964). The Judicial Mind: The Attitudes and Ideologies of Supreme Court Justices, 1946–1963. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
Schubert, Glendon (1969). “Judicial Attitudes and Policy-making in the Dixon Court.” Osgoode Hall Law Journal 7: 1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schubert, Glendon (1974). The Judicial Mind Revisited: Psychometric Analysis of Supreme Court Ideology. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Schubert, Glendon and Danelski, David J., eds. (1969). Comparative Judicial Behavior: Cross-Cultural Studies of Political Decision-Making in the East and West. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Spence, Ian (1972). “A Monte Carlo Evaluation of Three Nonmetric Multidimensional Scaling Algorithms.” Psychometrika 37: 461–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ulmer, S. Sidney (1975). Book Review of The Judicial Mind Revisited. Jurimetrics Journal 16: 52–58.Google Scholar
Young, Forrest W., de Leeuw, Jan and Takane, Yoshio (1976). “Regression with Qualitative and Quantitative Variables: An Alternating Least Squares Method with Optimal Scaling Features.” Psychometrika 41: 505–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar