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
×
  1. Home
  2. Journals
  3. Law & Social Inquiry
  4. Volume 24
Journal Home
Refine listing

Refine listing

Access:
Publication date:

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

Volume 24 - Fall 1999

Contents

Page 2 of 3

The Legacy of Lochner

Review Section Symposium

“From the Trenches and Towers”

  • From the Field to the Courthouse: Should Social Science Research Be Privileged?

  • Robert H. McLaughlin
  • Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    27 December 2018, pp. 927-965

  • Social scientists need clarification about the extent to which the confidential aspects of their research are protected from compulsory disclosure in legal proceedings, and the extent to which they ought to be. Investigating the nature of social science research with an emphasis on researcher-participant relationships in ethnographic practice, I conclude that a qualified privilege would confer three major benefits on social science researchers: confidence that the government will not unnecessarily interfere with research, facilitation of improved researcher-participant relationships, and increased accuracy, thoroughness, and reliability of research data. I also discuss the development of privilege and confidentiality issues in practical research contexts through an examination of two criminal cases in which social science researchers refused to divulge the confidential information obtained in the course of research. Finally, I discuss the possible formulations of a scholarly research privilege. This is especially important because courts have cast social scientists as members of the larger community of academic or scholarly researchers with respect to these issues. Potential sources of protection include state journalist protection laws, federal common law, and federal statutory law. Evaluation of these sources and the case law to which they correspond suggests that developing common law privileges in state and federal jurisprudence is the most promising means of affording the confidential aspects of social science research legal protection. As researchers continue to press privilege issues in state and federal courts, these courts should recognize a qualified research privilege accordingly.

Review Essay

The Legacy of Lochner

Review Section Symposium

Review Essay

Commentary

Book Notes

Commentary

Review Essay

Review Section Commentary: Losing One's Head

Review Essay

Commentary

Front matter

  • LSI volume 24 issue 3 Cover and Front matter

  • Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    27 December 2018, pp. f1-f7
    • Article
      • You have access
    • PDF
    • Export citation

  • LSI volume 24 issue 2 Cover and Front matter

  • Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    27 December 2018, pp. f1-f5
    • Article
      • You have access
    • PDF
    • Export citation

Review Essay

Back matter

  • LSI volume 24 issue 3 Cover and Back matter

  • Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    27 December 2018, pp. b1-b10
    • Article
      • You have access
    • PDF
    • Export citation

  • LSI volume 24 issue 2 Cover and Back matter

  • Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    27 December 2018, pp. b1-b12
    • Article
      • You have access
    • PDF
    • Export citation

Commentary

Page 2 of 3