Off-campus UNL users: To download campus access dissertations, please use the following link to log into our proxy server with your NU ID and password. When you are done browsing please remember to return to this page and log out.

Non-UNL users: Please talk to your librarian about requesting this dissertation through interlibrary loan.

The utilization of social science research by the federal judiciary: A quantitative analysis of obscenity opinions

Allen James Brown, University of Nebraska - Lincoln

Abstract

In Brown v. Board of Education (1954), the United States Supreme Court cited social science in its landmark ruling that racially segregated schools violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, the first time such research was used in an opinion overruling a law. The Court's use of social science research in this landmark decision sparked substantial controversy, commentary, and research. Although most of this commentary has not employed empirical analysis, recent efforts have been made to empirically determine the extent and nature of the judicial utilization of social science authority. The present study thus follows in the tradition of these recent studies and adds to the knowledge gained from previous research by focusing on a different substantive area of law and by testing specific hypotheses. The substantive area of law chosen for the present study was the law of obscenity. As defined by the United States Supreme Court, obscenity law is based on a number of assumptions about the impact which viewing obscene material has on human beliefs and behavior. These psychological and behavioral assumptions have been the focus of extensive empirical scrutiny which has resulted in the development of a substantial body of research which was available for courts to draw upon in their decision making. A citation analysis, using both frequency and prominence of citation to social science research, was performed on federal court obscenity opinions to determine whether this body of research was utilized in the decision making process. It was discovered that federal courts rarely cite social science research in obscenity cases. However, when federal courts did cite social science research in obscenity cases, its use varied as a function of whether the research supported maintaining the legal status quo or supported legal change. Courts cited research which supported the law under review in cases which were upheld with greater frequency and prominence than research which did not support the law in cases which overturned the law.

Subject Area

Psychology|Psychotherapy|Law

Recommended Citation

Brown, Allen James, "The utilization of social science research by the federal judiciary: A quantitative analysis of obscenity opinions" (1989). ETD collection for University of Nebraska-Lincoln. AAI9019558.
https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/dissertations/AAI9019558

Share

COinS