Crossref Citations
This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by
Crossref.
Krewson, Christopher N.
2019.
Strategic Sensationalism: Why Justices Use Emotional Appeals in Supreme Court Opinions.
Justice System Journal,
Vol. 40,
Issue. 4,
p.
319.
Budziak, Jeffrey
Hitt, Matthew P.
and
Lempert, Daniel
2019.
Determinants of Writing Style on the United States Circuit Courts of Appeals.
Journal of Law and Courts,
Vol. 7,
Issue. 1,
p.
1.
Hazelton, Morgan L. W.
Hinkle, Rachael K.
and
Spriggs, James F.
2019.
The Influence of Unique Information in Briefs on Supreme Court Opinion Content.
Justice System Journal,
Vol. 40,
Issue. 2,
p.
126.
Gleason, Shane A.
Jones, Jennifer J.
and
McBean, Jessica Rae
2019.
The Role of Gender Norms in Judicial Decision-Making at the U.S. Supreme Court: The Case of Male and Female Justices.
American Politics Research,
Vol. 47,
Issue. 3,
p.
494.
Prinsloo, Paul
Slade, Sharon
and
Khalil, Mohammad
2019.
Student data privacy in MOOCs: a sentiment analysis.
Distance Education,
Vol. 40,
Issue. 3,
p.
395.
Parker, Christopher M.
and
Woodson, Benjamin W.
2020.
Normative Preferences and Responses to Dissension on the U.S. Supreme Court.
Justice System Journal,
Vol. 41,
Issue. 3,
p.
220.
Li, Siyu
and
Pryor, Tom
2020.
Humor and Persuasion: The Effects of Laughter during US Supreme Court's Oral Arguments.
Law & Policy,
Vol. 42,
Issue. 2,
p.
162.
Johnson, Rebecca A.
and
Rostain, Tanina
2020.
Tool for Surveillance or Spotlight on Inequality? Big Data and the Law.
Annual Review of Law and Social Science,
Vol. 16,
Issue. 1,
p.
453.
Gleason, Shane A.
2020.
Beyond Mere Presence: Gender Norms in Oral Arguments at the U.S. Supreme Court.
Political Research Quarterly,
Vol. 73,
Issue. 3,
p.
596.
Frankenreiter, Jens
and
Livermore, Michael A.
2020.
Computational Methods in Legal Analysis.
Annual Review of Law and Social Science,
Vol. 16,
Issue. 1,
p.
39.
Gleason, Shane A.
and
Ivy, Diana K.
2021.
As She Was Saying: The Role of Gender and Narratives in Oral Argument Amicus Success.
Justice System Journal,
Vol. 42,
Issue. 3-4,
p.
416.
OSNABRÜGGE, MORITZ
HOBOLT, SARA B.
and
RODON, TONI
2021.
Playing to the Gallery: Emotive Rhetoric in Parliaments.
American Political Science Review,
Vol. 115,
Issue. 3,
p.
885.
Rice, Douglas R.
and
Zorn, Christopher
2021.
Corpus-based dictionaries for sentiment analysis of specialized vocabularies.
Political Science Research and Methods,
Vol. 9,
Issue. 1,
p.
20.
Black, Ryan C.
and
Owens, Ryan J.
2021.
TRENDS: The Influence of Personalized Knowledge at the Supreme Court: How (Some) Former Law Clerks Have the Inside Track.
Political Research Quarterly,
Vol. 74,
Issue. 4,
p.
795.
Ballingrud, Gordon
2021.
Ideology and Risk Focus: Conservatism and Opinion‐Writing In the U.S. Supreme Court.
Social Science Quarterly,
Vol. 102,
Issue. 1,
p.
281.
Dyevre, Arthur
and
Wijtvliet, Wessel
2021.
The Modern‐Day Cicero: An Alternative Interpretation of the Work of Ronald Dworkin.
Ratio Juris,
Vol. 34,
Issue. 4,
p.
356.
McCammon, Holly J.
and
Beeson-Lynch, Cathryn
2021.
Fighting Words: Pro-Choice Cause Lawyering, Legal-Framing Innovations, and Hostile Political-Legal Contexts.
Law & Social Inquiry,
Vol. 46,
Issue. 3,
p.
599.
Schillemans, Thomas
2022.
Accountability and the Quality of Regulatory Judgment Processes. Experimental Research Offering Both Confirmation and Consolation.
Public Performance & Management Review,
Vol. 45,
Issue. 3,
p.
473.
Hack, Jonathan S.
and
Jenkins, Clinton M.
2022.
The Attorneys’ Gender: Exploring Counsel Success before the U.S. Supreme Court.
Political Research Quarterly,
Vol. 75,
Issue. 3,
p.
632.
Owens, Ryan J.
2023.
Order effects and oral argument at the US Supreme Court.
Social Science Quarterly,
Vol. 104,
Issue. 6,
p.
1222.