1. The new legal scholarship discussed in this paper often has found a place in other disciplines, most notably in the social sciences, before finding its place in law. What is newest about much of this work, then, is its growing recognition and acceptance in law school settings.

2. Schlegel, J., “Between the Harvard Founders and the American Legal Realists: The Professionalization of the American Law Professor,” unpublished paper delivered at the ninth annual meeting of the American Society for Legal History, Williamsburg, Va., October 27, 1979Google Scholar; see also Schlegel, , “Langdell's Legacy, or the Case of the Empty Envelope,” Stanford Law Review 36(1984), 1517CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

3. Even advocates of alternative traditions regularly concede this point, and wish this approach further success. See, for example, Posner, , “The Present Situation in Legal Scholarship,” Yale Law Journal 90(1981), 1113CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

4. See Schlegel, , “American Legal Realism and Empirical Social Science: From the Yale Experience,” Buffalo Law Review 28 (1979), 459Google Scholar. Of course, the legal realist movement extended far beyond Yale. See Rumble, W., “American Legal Realism” (1968)Google Scholar; Twining, W., “Karl Llewellyn and the Realist Movement” (1973)Google Scholar; Bechtler, , “American Legal Realism Revaluated,” in Bechtler, T. (ed.), Law in a Social Context. Liber Amicorum Honouring Professor Lon L. Fuller (1978)Google Scholar; Schlegel, , “American Legal Realism and Empirical Social Science: The Singular Case of Underhill Moore,” Buffalo Law Review 29 (1980), 196Google Scholar; Verdun-Jones, , “The Jurisprudence of Karl Llewellyn,” Dalhousie Law Review 1 (1974), 441Google Scholar.

5. See Trubek, , “Where the Action Is: Critical Legal Studies and Empiricism,” Stanford Law Review 36 (1984), 575CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

6. See generally, for example, Casebeer, , “Escape from Liberalism: Fact and Value in Karl Llewellyn,” Duke Law Journal (1977), 671CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

7. Schlegel, “American Legal Realism.”

8. Trubek, “Where the Action Is.”

9. Galanter, , “Why the ‘Haves’ Come Out Ahead: Speculations on the Limits of Legal Change,” Law and Society Review 9 (1974), 95CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

10. See, for example, Kennedy, , “Form and Substance in Private Law Adjudication,” Harvard Law Review 89 (1976), 1685CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Kennedy, , “The Structure of Blackstone's Commentaries,” Buffalo Law Review 28 (1979), 205Google Scholar; Gordon, , “Historicism in Legal Scholarship,” Yale Law Journal 90 (1981), 1017CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Tushnet, , “Legal Scholarship: Its Cause and Cure,” Yale Law Journal 90 (1981), 1205CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

11. Trubek, “Where the Action Is.”

12. For an excellent review of recent work in this tradition, see Hutchinson, and Monahan, , “Law, Politics and the Critical Legal Scholars: The Unfolding Drama of American Legal Thought,” Stanford Law Review 36 (1985), 199CrossRefGoogle Scholar; see also Gordon, , “Critical Legal Histories,” Stanford Law Review 36 (1984), 57CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

13. These designations include law and behavioural science, socio-legal studies, law and sociology, law and economics, and law and society.

14. Of course, it frequently is argued that this is an aspiration, indeed an affectation, as much or more than an achievement. See generally Adorno, T., Habemas, J., Pilot, H. & Popper, K., The Positivist Debate in German Sociology, Adey, G. and Frisby, D. (trans.) (London: Heinemann, 1976)Google Scholar. See more specifically Tushnet, , “Post-Realist Legal Scholarship,” Wisconsin Law Review (1980), 1383Google Scholar. Responses to this kind of argument are found in Nettler, G., Explanations (New York: McGraw-Hill Co., 1970)Google Scholar and in McDonald, L., The Sociology of Law and Order (London: Faber and Faber, 1976)Google Scholar, especially Ch. 8 on “The Debate on Methodology: Positivism and Praxis.” I will not attempt to review or resolve this debate here.

15. Macaulay, , “Non-Contractual Relations in Business: A Preliminary Study,” American Sociology Review 28 (1963), 55CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

16. See Trubek, , “Where the Action Is,” 620Google Scholar.

17. The following paragraphs draw heavily from the remarks of Marc Galanter, prepared for the Task Force on Legal Research of the Canadian Institute for Advanced Research, Montreal, October 14–15, 1984. See also Galanter, , “The Legal Malaise: Or, Justice Observed,” Law and Society Review 19 (1985), 537CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

18. See Black, D., The Behavior of Law (New York: Academic Press, 1976)Google Scholar.

19. Galanter, remarks for the Task Force on Legal Research. See also Mnookin, & Kornhauser, , “Bargaining in the Shadow of the Law: The Case of Divorce,” Yale Law Journal 88 (1979), 950CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

20. Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, “Report on Law and Learning,” (1983), 153Google Scholar.

21. See, for example, Vidmar, & Judson, , “The Use of Social Science Data in a Change of Venue Application: A Case Study,” Canadian Bar Review 59 (1981), 76Google Scholar.

22. See, for example, Wolf, , “Social Science and the Courts: Detroit School,” Public Interest 42 (1976), 12Google Scholar; Rubinfeld, , “Econometrics in the Courtroom,” paper presented to the Conference on New Directions in Law and Economics, Center for Law and Economic Studies, Columbia University, November 16, 1984Google Scholar.

23. See, forexample, Berk, , Lehihan, and Rossi, , “Crime and Poverty: Some Experimental Evidence from Ex-Offenders,” American Sociology Review 45 (1980), 766CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Sherman, and Berk, , “The Specific Deterrent Effects of Arrest for Domestic Assault,” American Sociology Review 49 (1984), 261CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed; but see also Ziegel, , “Disagreement over the Evaluation of a Controlled Experiment,” American Journal of Sociology 88 (1982), 378Google Scholar.

24. For an early and important attempt to mix the methods of experimental and non-experimental design in legal research, see Lempert, , “Strategies of Research Design in the Legal Impact Study,” Law and Society Review 1 (1966), 111CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

25. See Fisher, , “Multiple Regression inLegal Proceedings,” Columbia Law Review 80 (1980), 702CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Finkelstein, , “The Judicial Reception of Multiple Regression Studies in Race and Sex Discrimination Cases,” Columbia Law Review 80 (1980), 737CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hoffman, and Quade, , “Regression and Discrimination: A Case of Lack of Fit,” Social Methodology and Research 11 (1983), 407CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

26. See Marc Galanter, remarks prepared for presentation to the Task Force on Legal Research.

27. Association of American Law Schools' Workshop on the Role of Social Science in Legal Scholarship and Legal Education, Arlington, Virginia, November 1-3, 1984.

28. See Priest, , “The Common Law Process and the Selection of Efficient Rules,” Journal of Legal Study 6 (1977), 65CrossRefGoogle Scholar; “Selective Characteristics of Litigation,” Journal of Legal Study 9 (1980), 399CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Priest, and Klein, , “The Selection of Disputes for Litigation,” Journal of Legal Study 13 (1984), 1CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

29. Ibid., 1.

30. Llewellyn, K.N., The Bramble Bush: On Our Law and Its Study (New York: Oceana Publications, 1951)Google Scholar.

31. Ibid., 58.

32. Hurst, James Willard, “The Functions of Courts in the United States: 1950-1980,” Law and Society Review 15 (1980–1981), 401CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

33. Ross, H. Laurence, Settled out of Court. The Social Process of Insurance Claims Adjustments (Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company, 1970), 216Google Scholar.

34. Conrad, A.F., Morgan, , Pratt, Jr., Voltz, & Bombaugh, , Automobile Accident Costs and Payments: Studies in the Economics of Injury Reparation (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1984), 155, 241Google Scholar.

35. Kalven, Harry Jr., and Zeisel, Hans, The American Jury (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1971)Google Scholar.

36. Kalven, Jr., “The Dignity of the Civil Jury,” Virginia Law Review 50 (1964), 1055, 1072CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

37. Priest, and Klein, , “The Selection of Disputes for Litigation,” 4Google Scholar.

38. Ibid., 6.

39. Ibid., 6.

40. Felstiner, , Abel, & Sarat, , “The Emergence and Transformation of Disputes: Naming, Blaming, Claiming …,” Law and Society Review 15 (1980–1981), 631CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

41. Galanter, , “Reading the Landscape of Disputes: What We Know and Don't Know (and Think We Know) About Our Alledgedly Contentious and Litigious Society,” UCLA Law Review 31 (1983), 4Google Scholar. See also Miller, & Sarat, , “Grievances, Claims, and Disputes: Assessing the Adversary Culture,” Law and Society Review 15 (1980–1981), 525, 527CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Galanter goes on to note that a different terminology is employed by other researchers: Mather and Ynguesson use the term “dispute” to refer to a “conflict between two parties (individuals or groups) [that] is asserted publicly — that is, before a third party.” Mather, and Ynguesson, , “Language, Audience, and the Transformation of Disputes,” Law and Society Review 15 (1980–1981), 775, 776CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Cf. Gulliver, P., “Disputes and Negotiations: A Cross-Cultural Perspective,” (1979), 75–76Google Scholar (a dispute occurs when the parties are unable to resolve their disagreement and one of them decides to take it into the public domain); Nader, Laura and Todd, Harry F. (eds.), The Disputing Process — Law in Ten Societies (New York: Columbia University Press, 1978), 15Google Scholar (a dispute results when a personal conflict escalates and is made public). Felstiner, , Abel, and Sarat, , “The Emergence and Transformation of Disputes,” 632nGoogle Scholar; note that the traditional way to define disputes is to adopt the definitions of civil or criminal law, the result of which is to see the social world through the eyes of the existing political structure. Such a view accepts conventional understanding as adequate and conventional ideas of justice as given. Felstiner et al. instead urge us “… to learn how disputants themselves define their experiences.”

42. Galanter, , “Reading the Landscape of Disputes,” 12Google Scholar.

43. Felstiner, et al. “The Emergence and Transformation of Disputes,” 632nGoogle Scholar; Best, & Andreasen, , “Consumer Response to Unsatisfactory Purchases: A Survey of Perceiving Defects, Voicing Complaints, and Obtaining Redress,” Law and Society Review 11 (1977), 701CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

44. Fleming, , “Court Survival in the Litigation Explosion,” Judicature 54 (1970), 109Google Scholar; Tribe, , “Too Much Law, Too Little Justice: An Argument for Delegalizing America,” Atlanta Monthly (July 1979), 25Google Scholar; Silberman, , “Will Lawyering Strangle Democratic Capitalism?” Regulation (Mar.-Apr. 1978), 15Google Scholar; Manning, , “Hyperlexis: Our National Disease,” New Virginia Law Review 71 (1979), 767Google Scholar; Burger, , “Isn't There a Better Way?” American Bar Association Journal 68 (1982), 274Google Scholar.

45. Curran, Barbara A., The Legal Needs of the Public: A Final Report of a National Survey (Chicago: The American Bar Foundation, 1977)Google Scholar; Caplovitz, David, The Poor Pay More: Consumer Practices of Low-Income Families (New York: Free Press of Glencoe, 1963)Google Scholar; Marks, , “Some Research Perspectives for Looking at Legal Need and Legal Services: Old Forms or New?” Law and Society Review 11 (1976), 191CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

46. Prichard, , “A Systematic Approach to Comparative Law: The Effect of Cost, Fee and Financing Rules on the Development of the Substantive Law,” forthcoming, Journal of Legal Studies (1985)Google Scholar.

47. See also Russell, , “The Political Role of the Supreme Court of Canada in its First Century,” Canadian Bar Review 53 (1975), 576Google Scholar and “The Effect of a Charter of Rights on the Policy-Making Role of Canadian Courts,” Canadian Public Administration 25 (1982), 1CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

48. See Abel, , “The Sociology of American Lawyers: A Bibliographic Guide,” Law and Policy Quarterly 2 (1980), 335CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

49. For an excellent review of Canadian work in this area, see Arthurs, and Zemans, , “The Canadian Legal Professions,” forthcoming, American Bar Foundation Research Journal (1985)Google Scholar; for a fascinating view of the “other side” of the legal profession, see Reasons, and Chappell, , “Crocked Lawyers: Toward a Political Economy of Deviance in the Profession,” in Felming, T. (ed.), The New Criminologies in Canada (1985)Google Scholar.

50. Macaulay, , “Law Schools and the World Outside Their Doors II: Some Notes on Two Recent Studies of the Chicago Bar,” Journal of Legal Education 32 (1982), 506Google Scholar. Fossum, , “Law Professors: A Profile of the Teaching Branch of the Legal Profession,” American Bar Foundation Research Journal 3 (1980), 501Google Scholar.

51. Galanter, , “Mega-Law and Mega-Lawyering in the Contemporary United States,” in Dingwall, R. and Lewis, B. (eds.), The Sociology of the Professions: Lawyers, Doctors and Others, 152Google Scholar.

52. See Macaulay, , “Professional Competence and the Law — What's at Stake: The Educator's Perspective,” in Trakman, Leon, Professional Competence and the Law (Halifax, N.S.: Faculty of Law, Dalhousie University, 1981)Google Scholar.

53. Galanter, “Mega-Law and Mega-Lawyering.”

54. Coleman, James S., Power and the Structure of Society (New York: Norton, 1974)Google Scholar.

55. Hodson, and Kaufman, , “Economic Dualism: A Critical Review,” American Sociology Review 41 (1982), 727CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

56. Dearinger, Peter B. and Piore, Michael J., Internal Labor Markets and Manpower Analysis (Lexington: Heath Lexington Books, 1971)Google Scholar.

57. O'Conner, James R., The Fiscal Crisis of the State (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1973)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

58. Hodson and Kaufman, “Economic Dualism.”

59. Bluestone, , “The Tripartite Economy: Labor Markets and the Working Poor,” Poverty and Human Resources 5 (1970), 15Google Scholar.

60. Gordon, David M., Theories of Poverty and Underemployment (Lexington, Mass.: Lexington Books, 1972)Google Scholar.

61. Rosenbaum, , “Organizational Career Mobility: Promotion Chances in a Corporation During Periods of Growth and Contraction,” American Journal of Sociology 85 (1979), 21CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

62. Baron, and Bielby, , “Bringing the Firms Back In: Stratification, Segmentation, and the Organization of Work,” American Sociology Review 45 (1980), 737CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Sorensen, and Kalleberg, , in Berg, Ivar E., Sociological Perspectives on Labor Markets (New York; Toronto: Academic Press, 1981)Google Scholar.

63. Goulden, Joseph C., The Superlawyers (New York: Weybright and Talley, 1971)Google Scholar.

64. Carlin, Jerome E., Lawyers on Their Own (New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press, 1962)Google Scholar; Ladinsky, , “Careers of Lawyers, Law Practice, and Legal Institutions,” American Sociology Review 28 (1963), 47CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Heinz, John P. and Laumann, Edward O., Chicago Lawyers (Chicago: American Bar Foundation, 1982)Google Scholar.

65. National Law Journal (1979).

66. Arthurs, , “The Toronto Legal Profession: An Exploratory Study,” University of Toronto La w Journal 21 (1971). 498CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

67. Adam, & Lahey, , “Professional Opportunities: A Survey of the Ontario Legal Profession,” Canadian Bar Review 59 (1981), 674Google Scholar.

68. Clement, Wallace, The Canadian Corporate Elite: An Analysis of Economic Power (Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, 1975)Google Scholar.

69. Porter, John A., The Vertical Mosaic (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1965)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

70. Clement, The Canadian Corporate Elite.

71. Niosi, Jorge, The Economy of Canada (Montreal: Black Rose Books, 1978)Google Scholar.

72. Rueschemeyer, Dietrich, Lawyers and Their Society (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1973)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

73. Green, Mark J., The Other Government: The Unseen Power of the Washington Lawyer (New York: W.W. Norton and Co., 1978)Google Scholar; Smigel, Erwin O., The Wall Street Lawyer (New York: Free Press of Glencoe, 1964)Google Scholar; see also Blaustein, Albert P. and Porter, Charles O., The American Lawyer: A Summary of the Survey of the Legal Profession (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1954)Google Scholar; Laumann, and Heinz, , “Specialization and Prestige in the Legal Profession: The Structure of Deference,” American Bar Foundation Research Journal (1977), 155Google Scholar; Handler, Joel F., The Lawyer and His Community: The Practicing Bar in a Middle-Sized City (Madison, Wis.: The University of Wisconsin Press, 1967)Google Scholar; Johnstone, Quintin and Hopson, Dan, Lawyers and Their Work: An Analysis of the Legal Profession in the United States and England (Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1967)Google Scholar.

74. Heinz and Laumann, Chicago Lawyers.

75. Ibid.

76. Zemans, Frances K. and Rosenblum, Victor G., The Making of a Public Profession (Chicago: American Bar Foundation, 1981)Google Scholar.

77. Macaulay, , “Law Schools and the World Outside Their Doors,” 522Google Scholar.

78. See Wigle, , “Sisters in Law,” Canadian Bar Review 5 (1929), 419Google Scholar.

79. Smith, , Stephenson, & Quijana, , “The Legal Profession and Women: Finding Articles in British Columbia,” University of British Columbia Law Review 8 (1973), 137Google Scholar.

80. Erlanger, , “The Allocation of Status Within Occupations: The Case of the Legal Profession,” Social Forces 58 (1980), 882CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

81. Arthurs, “The Toronto Legal Profession.”

82. Adam and Lahey, “Professional Opportunities.” See also Adam, , “Stigma and Employability,” Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology 18 (1981), 216CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Adam, and Baer, , “The Social Mobility of Women and Men in the Ontario Legal Profession,” Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology 21 (1984), 21CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

83. Kalleberg, & Hudis, , “Wage Change in the Late Career: A Model for the Outcomes of Job Sequences,” Social Science Research 8 (1979), 16CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Felmlee, , “Women's Job Mobility Processes Within and Between Employers,” American Sociology Review 47 (1982), 142CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

84. See Hagan, John, The Disreputable Pleasures: Crime and Deviance in Canada (Toronto: McGraw-Hill Ryerson, 1984), 42–46Google Scholar; Turk, Austin, Criminality and the Legal Order (Chicago: Rand McNally and Co., 1969)Google Scholar; Evan, and Leger, , “Canadian Victimization Surveys,” Canadian Journal of Criminology 21 (1979), 166Google Scholar; Silverman, Robert A. and Teevan, James, Crime in Canadian Society (Toronto: Butterworths, 1980)Google Scholar. As an anonymous reviewer suggests, it is possible that some part of the large attrition pointed to above results from wrongfully contrasting figures for crime with figures for criminals on the assumption that each criminal commits only one crime, and that the charges are accurate and well founded in the first place.

85. Reiss, Albert J., The Police and the Public (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1971)Google Scholar; Shearing, Clifford D., Organizational Police Deviance (Toronto: Butterworths, 1981)Google Scholar.

86. Hagan, , Nagel, & Albonetti, , “The Differential Sentencing of White Collar Offenders in Ten Federal District Courts,” American Sociology Review 45 (1980), 802CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

87. Prominently cited Canadian examples of the role of social history in this kind of legal scholarship are found in Friedland, Martin, A Century of Criminal Justice (Toronto: Carswell Legal Publications, 1984)Google Scholar; Hagan, J., “Rediscovering Delinquency: Social History, Political Ideology and the Sociology of Law,” American Sociology Review 42 (1977), 587CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hay, Douglas, Linebaugh, P., Rule, J., Thompson, E.P. and Winslow, C., Albion's Fatal Tree (New York: Pantheon Books, 1975)Google Scholar; Goff, Colin and Reasons, C., Corporate Crime in Canada (Calgary: University of Calgary, 1975)Google Scholar; Kellough, , Brickey, and Grenway, , “The Politics of Incarceration,” Canadian Journal of Sociology 5 (1980), 253CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

88. Black, and Reiss, , “Police Control of Juveniles,” American Sociology Review 35 (1970), 63CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed.

89. See Black, , “The Social Organization of Arrest,” Stanford Law Review 23 (1971), 1087CrossRefGoogle Scholar. The findings of this American research are usefully compared with the research of Ericson, Richard V., Reproducing Order: A Study of Police Patrol Work (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. No mention of the police in Canada is complete without reference to the McDonald Royal Commission of Inquiry concerning Activities of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (1981).

90. Monkkonen, Eric H., Police in Urban America, 1860-1920 (Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1981)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Boritch, Helen, The Making of Toronto the Good: The Organization of Policing and the Production of Arrests, 1859-1955, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Toronto (1985)Google Scholar.

91. Alschuler, , “Comment: The Plea Bargain in Historical Perspective,” Buffalo Law Review 23 (1974), 499Google Scholar.

92. Alschuler, , “Plea Bargaining and its History,” Law and Society Review 13 (1979), 211CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

93. Heumann, , “A Note on Plea Bargaining and Case Pressure,” Law and Society Review 9 (1975), 515CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also Alschuler, , “The Defense Attorney's Role in Plea Bargaining,” Yale Law Journal 84 (1975), 1179CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

94. Ferdinand, “Criminality, the Courts, and the Constabulary in Boston: 1703-1967,” unpublished manuscript.

95. Cited in Alschuler, “Comment: The Plea Bargain.”

96. Friedman, , “Plea Bargaining in Historical Perspective,” Law and Society Review 13 (1979), 247CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

97. The reliance on plea bargaining may be different, at least in degree, in Canada than in the United States. See also Cousineau, and Verdun-Jones, , “Evaluating Research into Plea Bargaining in Canada and the United States: Pitfalls Facing the Policy-makers,” Canadian Journal of Criminology 21 (1979), 293Google Scholar; Wynne, and Hartnagel, , “Plea Negotiation in Canada,” Canadian Journal of Criminology 17 (1975), 17Google Scholar.

98. See Alschuler, “Plea Bargaining and Its History” and Haller, , “Urban Crime and Criminal Justice: The Chicago Case,” Journal ofAmerican History 57 (1970), 619Google Scholar.

99. Haller, , “Historical Roots of Police Behavior: Chicago, 1890-1925,” Law and Society Review 10 (1975), 303CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

100. Pound, Roscoe, Criminal Justice in America (New York: De Capo Press, 1930)Google Scholar.

101. Mather, , “Some Determinants of the Method of Case Disposition: Decision-Making by Public Defenders in Los Angeles,” Law and Society Review 8 (1974), 187CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

102. Rothman, David J., Conscience and Convenience: The Asylum and Its Alternatives in Progressive America (Boston: Little, Brown, 1980)Google Scholar.

103. Eisenstein, James and Jacob, Herbert, Felony Justice (Boston: Little, Brown, 1977)Google Scholar.

104. Wheeler, Stanton (ed.), Controlling Delinquents (New York: John Wiley and Sons Inc., 1968)Google Scholar.

105. Towle, Charlotte, Common Human Needs (London: George Allen and Unwin Ltd., 1973)Google Scholar.

106. Chute, Charles L. and Bell, Marjorie, Crime, Courts and Probation (New York: The MacMillan Co., 1956)Google Scholar.

107. Whal, A. and Glaser, D., “Pilot Time Study of the Federal Probation Officer's Job,” Federal Probation 27 (1963), 20Google Scholar.

108. Hagan, , Hewitt, & Alwin, , “Ceremonial Justice: Crime and Punishment in a Loosely Coupled System,” Social Forces 58 (1979), 506CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

109. Peterson, & Hagan, , “Changing Conceptions of Race: Towards an Account of Anomalous Findings of Sentencing Research,” American Sociology Review 49 (1984), 56CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hagan, , Nagel, and Albonetti, , “The Differential Sentencing of White Collar Offenders in Ten Federal District Courts,” American Sociology Review 45 (1985), 50Google Scholar.

110. Hogarth, John, Sentencing as a Human Process (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1971)Google Scholar.