Improving the Credibility of Empirical Legal Research: Practical Suggestions for Researchers, Journals and Law Schools

Fields closely related to empirical legal research (ELR) are enhancing their methods to improve the credibility of their findings. This includes making data, analysis codes and other materials openly available on digital repositories and preregistering studies. There are numerous benefits to these p...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Jason M Chin, Alexander C DeHaven, Tobias Heycke, Alexander O Holcombe, David T Mellor, Justin T Pickett, Crystal N Steltenpohl, Simine Vazire, Kathryn Zeiler
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Queensland University of Technology 2021
Materias:	empirical legal research open science open access reproducibility meta-research Law in general. Comparative and uniform law. Jurisprudence K1-7720
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/ef3d196aa8af475fa0bc5ba8ee011443
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:ef3d196aa8af475fa0bc5ba8ee011443
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:ef3d196aa8af475fa0bc5ba8ee0114432021-11-08T01:48:43ZImproving the Credibility of Empirical Legal Research: Practical Suggestions for Researchers, Journals and Law Schools2652-407410.5204/lthj.1875https://doaj.org/article/ef3d196aa8af475fa0bc5ba8ee0114432021-11-01T00:00:00Zhttps://lthj.qut.edu.au/article/view/1875https://doaj.org/toc/2652-4074Fields closely related to empirical legal research (ELR) are enhancing their methods to improve the credibility of their findings. This includes making data, analysis codes and other materials openly available on digital repositories and preregistering studies. There are numerous benefits to these practices, such as research being easier to find and access through digital research methods. However, ELR appears to be lagging cognate fields. This may be partly due to a lack of field-specific meta-research and guidance. We sought to fill that gap by first evaluating credibility indicators in ELR, including a review of guidelines for legal journals. This review finds considerable room for improvement in how law journals regulate ELR. The remainder of the article provides practical guidance for the field. We start with general recommendations for empirical legal researchers and then turn to recommendations aimed at three commonly used empirical legal methods: content analyses of judicial decisions, surveys and qualitative studies. We end with suggestions for journals and law schools.Jason M ChinAlexander C DeHavenTobias HeyckeAlexander O HolcombeDavid T MellorJustin T PickettCrystal N SteltenpohlSimine VazireKathryn ZeilerQueensland University of Technologyarticleempirical legal researchopen scienceopen accessreproducibilitymeta-researchLaw in general. Comparative and uniform law. JurisprudenceK1-7720ENLaw, Technology and Humans, Vol 3, Iss 2, Pp 107-132 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	empirical legal research open science open access reproducibility meta-research Law in general. Comparative and uniform law. Jurisprudence K1-7720
spellingShingle	empirical legal research open science open access reproducibility meta-research Law in general. Comparative and uniform law. Jurisprudence K1-7720 Jason M Chin Alexander C DeHaven Tobias Heycke Alexander O Holcombe David T Mellor Justin T Pickett Crystal N Steltenpohl Simine Vazire Kathryn Zeiler Improving the Credibility of Empirical Legal Research: Practical Suggestions for Researchers, Journals and Law Schools
description	Fields closely related to empirical legal research (ELR) are enhancing their methods to improve the credibility of their findings. This includes making data, analysis codes and other materials openly available on digital repositories and preregistering studies. There are numerous benefits to these practices, such as research being easier to find and access through digital research methods. However, ELR appears to be lagging cognate fields. This may be partly due to a lack of field-specific meta-research and guidance. We sought to fill that gap by first evaluating credibility indicators in ELR, including a review of guidelines for legal journals. This review finds considerable room for improvement in how law journals regulate ELR. The remainder of the article provides practical guidance for the field. We start with general recommendations for empirical legal researchers and then turn to recommendations aimed at three commonly used empirical legal methods: content analyses of judicial decisions, surveys and qualitative studies. We end with suggestions for journals and law schools.
format	article
author	Jason M Chin Alexander C DeHaven Tobias Heycke Alexander O Holcombe David T Mellor Justin T Pickett Crystal N Steltenpohl Simine Vazire Kathryn Zeiler
author_facet	Jason M Chin Alexander C DeHaven Tobias Heycke Alexander O Holcombe David T Mellor Justin T Pickett Crystal N Steltenpohl Simine Vazire Kathryn Zeiler
author_sort	Jason M Chin
title	Improving the Credibility of Empirical Legal Research: Practical Suggestions for Researchers, Journals and Law Schools
title_short	Improving the Credibility of Empirical Legal Research: Practical Suggestions for Researchers, Journals and Law Schools
title_full	Improving the Credibility of Empirical Legal Research: Practical Suggestions for Researchers, Journals and Law Schools
title_fullStr	Improving the Credibility of Empirical Legal Research: Practical Suggestions for Researchers, Journals and Law Schools
title_full_unstemmed	Improving the Credibility of Empirical Legal Research: Practical Suggestions for Researchers, Journals and Law Schools
title_sort	improving the credibility of empirical legal research: practical suggestions for researchers, journals and law schools
publisher	Queensland University of Technology
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/ef3d196aa8af475fa0bc5ba8ee011443
work_keys_str_mv	AT jasonmchin improvingthecredibilityofempiricallegalresearchpracticalsuggestionsforresearchersjournalsandlawschools AT alexandercdehaven improvingthecredibilityofempiricallegalresearchpracticalsuggestionsforresearchersjournalsandlawschools AT tobiasheycke improvingthecredibilityofempiricallegalresearchpracticalsuggestionsforresearchersjournalsandlawschools AT alexanderoholcombe improvingthecredibilityofempiricallegalresearchpracticalsuggestionsforresearchersjournalsandlawschools AT davidtmellor improvingthecredibilityofempiricallegalresearchpracticalsuggestionsforresearchersjournalsandlawschools AT justintpickett improvingthecredibilityofempiricallegalresearchpracticalsuggestionsforresearchersjournalsandlawschools AT crystalnsteltenpohl improvingthecredibilityofempiricallegalresearchpracticalsuggestionsforresearchersjournalsandlawschools AT siminevazire improvingthecredibilityofempiricallegalresearchpracticalsuggestionsforresearchersjournalsandlawschools AT kathrynzeiler improvingthecredibilityofempiricallegalresearchpracticalsuggestionsforresearchersjournalsandlawschools
_version_	1718443324463906816

Improving the Credibility of Empirical Legal Research: Practical Suggestions for Researchers, Journals and Law Schools

Ejemplares similares