Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Handbook of Community Sentiment pp 43–54Cite as

Methods and Measures Used in Gauging Community Sentiment

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Abstract

Building on Chap. 2, this chapter establishes the nexus between community sentiment and the law and details the various ways in which community sentiment impacts law and policy. The general paradigms (e.g., analyses of jury decisions data and public opinion polls) used to capture community sentiment are then outlined and critiqued. Because impressions of community sentiment impact law and policy decisions, it is important that the samples drawn are representative of a community and the tools used to measure it are valid. Thus, this chapter highlights some of the complexities of accurately capturing community sentiment and provides a review of some sampling and measurement concerns in gauging community sentiment. Finally, recommendations are made to help avoid common measurement pitfalls.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Berdejo, C., & Yuchtman, N. (2013). Crime, punishment and politics: An analysis of political cycles in sentencing. Review of Economics and Statistics., 95, 741–756.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blumenthal, J. A. (2003). Who decides? Privileging public sentiment about justice and the substantive law. UMKC Law Review, 72, 1–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bohm, R. M., Clark, L. J., & Aveni, A. F. (1991). Knowledge and death penalty opinion: A test of the Marshall hypothesis. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 28, 360–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bornstein, B. H. (1999). The ecological validity of jury simulations: Is the jury still out? Law & Human Behavior, 23(1), 75–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowers v. Hardwick, 478 U.S. 186 (1986).

    Google Scholar 

  • Brank, E. M., Hays, S. A., & Weisz, V. (2006). Global and specific attitudes toward parental responsibility. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 36, 2670–2684. doi:10.1111/j.0021-9029.2006.00122.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burke, B. L., Martens, A., & Faucher, E. H. (2010). Two decades of terror management theory: A meta-analysis of mortality salience research. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 14(2), 155–195. doi:10.1177/1088868309352321.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cochran, J. K., Sanders, B., & Chamlin, M. B. (2006). Profiles in change: An alternative look at the Marshall hypotheses. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 17(2), 205–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diamond, S. S. (2011). Reference guide on survey research. In Reference manual on scientific evidence (pp. 359–424). Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dillman, D. A., & Tarnai, J. (1988). Administrative issues in mixed mode surveys. In R. M. Groves, P. P. Biemer, L. E. Lyberg, J. T. Massey, W. L. Nicholls, & J. Waksberg (Eds.), Telephone survey methodology (pp. 509–528). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finkel, N. J. (1993). Socioscientific evidence and Supreme Court numerology: When justices attempt social science. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 11, 67–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finkel, N. J. (1995). Commonsense justice: Jurors’ notions of the law. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finkel, N. J., & Duff, K. B. (1991). Felony-murder and community sentiment: Testing the Supreme Courts’ assertions. Law and Human Behavior, 15, 405–429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finkel, N. J., Hurabiell, M. L., & Hughes, K. C. (1993). Right to die, euthanasia, and community sentiment: Crossing the public/private boundary. Law and Human Behavior, 17, 487–506.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Furman v. Georgia, 408 U.S. 238 (1972).

    Google Scholar 

  • Garberg, N., & Libkuman, T. (2009). Community sentiment and the juvenile offender: Should juveniles charged with felony murder be waived into the adult criminal justice system? Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 27(4), 553–575. doi:10.1002/bsl.869.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gelman, A., & Hill, J. (2007). Missing data imputations. In A. Gelman & J. Hill (Eds.), Data analysis using regression and multilevel/hierarchical models (pp. 529–544). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, E., & Bornstein, B. H. (2003). Determining damages: The psychology of jury awards. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg, J., Solomon, S., Veeder, M., Pyszcynski, T., Rosenblatt, T., Kirkland, S., et al. (1990). Evidence for terror management theory II: The effects of mortality salience on reactions to those who threaten or bolster the cultural worldview. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 308–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guthrie, C. (2007). Misjudging. Nevada Law Journal, 7, 420–456.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henry, G. T. (1990). Practical sampling. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Horowitz, I. A., Kerr, N. L., Park, E. S., & Gockel, C. (2006). Chaos in the courtroom reconsidered: Emotional bias and juror nullification. Law and Human Behavior, 31, 163–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D., Schkade, D., & Sunstein, C. (1998). Shared outrage and erratic awards: The psychology of punitive damages. Journal of Risk & Uncertainty, 16(1), 49–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Katz, I., & Hass, R. G. (1988). Racial ambivalence and American value conflict: Correlational and priming studies of dual cognitive structures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 893–905.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kemmelmeier, M., & David, G. W. (2008). Sowing patriotism, but reaping nationalism? Consequences of exposure to the American flag. Political Psychology, 29(6), 859–879. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9221.2008.00670.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kwiatkowski, M. J., & Miller, M. K. (2014). How attitude functions, attitude change, and beliefs affect community sentiment toward the Facebook Law. In M. K. Miller, J. A. Blumenthal, & J. Chamberlain (Eds.), Handbook of community sentiment. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lavrakas, P. J. (1993). Telephone survey methods: Sampling, selection, and supervision (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003).

    Google Scholar 

  • Little, R. J. A., & Rubin, D. B. (1987). Statistical analysis with missing data. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manfreda, L., Bosnjak, M., Berzelak, J., Haas, I., & Vehovar, V. (2008). Web surveys versus other survey modes—A meta-analysis comparing response rates. International Journal of Market Research, 50, 79–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mangione, T. W. (1995). Mail surveys: Improving the quality. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, T. R. (1989). Public opinion and the Supreme Court. Winchester, MA: Unwin Hyman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, M. K., & Thomas, A. (2014). Understanding changes in community sentiment about drug use during pregnancy using a repeated measures design. In M. K. Miller, J. A. Blumenthal, & J. Chamberlain (Eds.), Handbook of community sentiment. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Association of State Jury Verdict Publishers. JuryVerdicts.com. http://www.juryverdicts.com (last visited June 10, 2013).

  • Oldmixon, E. A., & Calfano, B. R. (2007). The religious dynamics of decision making on gay rights issues in the U.S. House of Representatives, 1993–2002. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 46, 55–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992).

    Google Scholar 

  • Reichert, J., Miller, M. K., Bornstein, B. H., & Shelton, D. (2011). How reason for surgery and patient weight affect verdicts and perceptions in medical malpractice trials: A comparison of students and jurors. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 29(3), 395. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/880153075?accountid=34899

  • Robinson, P. H., & Darley, J. M. (1995). Justice, liability, and blame: Community views and the criminal law. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973).

    Google Scholar 

  • Sarat, A., & Vidmar, N. (1976). Public opinion, the death penalty, and the eighth amendment: Testing the Marshall hypothesis. Wisconsin Law Review, 17, 171–206.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schonlau, M., Fricker, R. D., & Elliot, M. N. (2002). Conducting research surveys via e-mail and the Web. Santa Monica: Rand.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seagate, S., & Pace, N. (2004). Forty years of civil jury verdicts. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, 1, 1–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shelton, D. (2012). Forensic science evidence: Can the law keep up with science? El Paso: LFB Scholarly Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shelton, D., Kim, Y., & Barak, G. (2006). A study of juror expectations and demands concerning scientific evidence: Does the “CSI effect” exist? Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law, 9, 331–368.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shelton, D., Kim, Y., & Barak, G. (2010). An indirect-effects model of mediated adjudication: The CSI myth, the tech effect, and metropolitan jurors’ expectations for scientific evidence. Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law, 12, 1–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shepherd, J. (2013). Justice at risk: An empirical analysis of campaign contributions and judicial decisions. American Constitution Society. Retrieved from http://www.acslaw.org/ACS%20Justice%20at%20Risk%20(FINAL)%206_10_13.pdf (last visited August 14, 2013).

  • Stalans, L. J., & Henry, G. T. (1994). Societal views of justice for adolescents accused of murder: Inconsistency between community sentiment and automatic legislative transfers. Law & Human Behavior, 18, 675–696.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stanford v. Kentucky, 492 U.S. 361 (1989).

    Google Scholar 

  • Stoutenborough, J. W., Haider-Markel, D. P., & Allen, M. D. (2006). Reassessing the impact of Supreme Court decisions on public opinion: Gay civil rights cases. Political Research Quarterly, 59, 419–433.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tourangeau, R., Rips, L. J., & Rasinski, K. (2000). The psychology of survey response. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Const. Amend. VIII.

    Google Scholar 

  • Uphoff, R. (2007). On misjudging and its implications for criminal defendants, their lawyers and the criminal justice system. Nevada Law Journal, 7, 521–547.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vidmar, N. (1995). Medical malpractice and the American jury: Confronting the myths about jury incompetence, deep pockets, and outrageous damage awards. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Viswanathan, M. (2005). Measurement error and research design. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weems v. U.S., 217 U.S. 349 (1910).

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiss, J. (2006). Tough on crime: How campaigns for state judiciary violate criminal defendants’ due process rights. New York University Law Review, 81, 1101–1136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Westlaw Database Directory. Westlaw, http://directory.westlaw.com/default.asp?GUID=WDIR00000000000000000000095399444&RS=W&VR=2.0 (last visited June 10, 2013).

  • Wiener, R. L., Habert, K., & Shkodriani, G. (1991). The social psychology of jury nullification: Predicting when jurors disobey the law. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 21, 1379–1401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Willyard, C. (2011, January). Men: A growing minority. GradPSYCH Magazine, 9(1). Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/gradpsych/index.aspx

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Arizona School of Professional Psychology at Argosy University, Phoenix, 2233 West Dunlap Avenue, Phoenix, AZ, 85021, USA

    Jared Chamberlain Ph.D.

  2. Criminal Justice Studies Program, University of Michigan - Dearborn, 500 S. Harris St., Saline, MI, 48176, USA

    Hon. Donald E. Shelton Ph.D., J.D. (Associate Professor and Director)

Authors
  1. Jared Chamberlain Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hon. Donald E. Shelton Ph.D., J.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jared Chamberlain Ph.D. .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Criminal Justice, University of Nevada, Reno, Reno, Nevada, USA

    Monica K. Miller

  2. Syracuse University College of Law, Syracuse, New York, USA

    Jeremy A. Blumenthal

  3. Arizona School of Professional Psychology, Argosy University, Phoenix, Arizona, USA

    Jared Chamberlain

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Chamberlain, J., Shelton, H.D.E. (2015). Methods and Measures Used in Gauging Community Sentiment. In: Miller, M., Blumenthal, J., Chamberlain, J. (eds) Handbook of Community Sentiment. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-1899-7_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation