The Pitfalls of Empirical Research: Studying Faculty Publication Studies
Ira Mark Ellman
Arizona State University College of Law; Arizona State University (ASU) - Department of Psychology; Center for the Study of Law and Society, Berkeley Law, University of California, Berkeley
David H. Kaye
Pennsylvania State University, Penn State Law
Journal of Legal Education, Vol. 36, p. 24, 1986
This article critiques empirical studies by attorneys in the hopes that they will be held to the minimal standards of research competence that are to be found in other academic fields which rely on empirical studies. Because law-trained scholars are notoriously weak at empirical research, this article identifies some of the methodological considerations that should inform empirical research. These fall into four broad categories: (1) problems of conceptualization, (2) problems of measurement, (3) problems of data presentation and analysis, and (4) problems of inference. This article examines all of these considerations in the context of an empirical survey done by Professors Swygert and Gozansky investigating the relationship between law faculty research and tenure.
Keywords: Empirical Research, Law Faculty, Professors Swygert and Gozansky
Date posted: September 3, 2009
© 2016 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollobot1 in 2.437 seconds