Search results

Objective. Drawing upon research that suggests that race and gender may shape judicial views about legal issues pertaining to these attributes, this study conducts an investigation of the influence of age on judicial decision making in age discrimination cases.Methods. This research analyzed 544 age bias rulings and 1,592 decisions in racial and gender discrimination cases handed down in the federal district courts from 1984 to 1995. Descriptive statistics incorporating cross‐product ratios were analyzed, and logit models were developed. Predicted probabilities were utilized to isolate differences in predicted decision‐making patterns for different age cohorts.Results. The youngest judges were least sympathetic to those who alleged that they were victims of age discrimination while the oldest judges were the most sympathetic to age discrimination claimants. This study also identified a generally more conservative decision‐making pattern in age cases compared to cases dealing with racial and gender discrimination.Conclusions. The data support the hypothesis that increased age corresponds with increased pro‐elderly decision making in age bias cases, though the effects appear at the age extremes among the very oldest and youngest judges. These results provide new evidence to support the social attribute model of judicial decision making, with a clear suggestion that some socioeconomic variables may affect judges' decision making differently over time.

A reply to Lee Epstein & Andrew D. Martin's comment on the authors' "Does Age Matter? Judicial Decision Making in Age Discrimination Cases" (both, 2004) takes issue with many of their assertions. It is argued that there is no theoretical justification for most of the cohorts that Epstein & Martin test & that the majority of them are not plausible. Further, inconsistencies in the model outcomes in race & gender cases raise questions as to the utility of age cohort as a predictor in such cases. While Epstein & Martin raise some interesting points regarding data grouping, & while acknowledging the possibility of debate over age cutoff points, the authors maintain that their findings are theoretically interesting & robust enough to evoke more extensive studies to determine the validity of their conclusions. 1 Table. Adapted from the source document.

Objective. Drawing upon research that suggests that race & gender may shape judicial views about legal issues pertaining to these attributes, this study conducts an investigation of the influence of age on judicial decision making in age discrimination cases. Methods. This research analyzed 544 age bias rulings & 1,592 decisions in racial & gender discrimination cases handed down in the federal district courts from 1984 to 1995. Descriptive statistics incorporating cross-product ratios were analyzed, & logit models were developed. Predicted probabilities were utilized to isolate differences in predicted decision-making patterns for different age cohorts. Results. The youngest judges were least sympathetic to those who alleged that they were victims of age discrimination while the oldest judges were the most sympathetic to age discrimination claimants. This study also identified a generally more conservative decision-making pattern in age cases compared to cases dealing with racial & gender discrimination. Conclusions. The data support the hypothesis that increased age corresponds with increased pro-elderly decision making in age bias cases, though the effects appear at the age extremes among the very oldest & youngest judges. These results provide new evidence to support the social attribute model of judicial decision making, with a clear suggestion that some socioeconomic variables may affect judges' decision making differently over time. 5 Tables, 3 Figures, 34 References. Adapted from the source document.

Drawing on research that suggests that race and gender may shape judicial views about legal issues pertaining to these attributes, conducts an investigation of the influence of age on judicial decision making in age discrimination cases. From an analysis of 544 age bias rulings and 1592 decisions in racial and gender discrimination cases handed down in the federal district courts from 1984 to 1995, concludes that increased age corresponds with increased pro-elderly decision making in age bias cases, though the effects appear at the age extremes among the very oldest and youngest judges. Results provide new evidence to support the social attribute model of judicial decision making, with a clear suggestion that some socioeconomic variables may affect judges' decision making differently over time. Includes a comment by Lee Epstein and Andrew D. Martin and a reply by the authors. (Original abstract - amended)