The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model Revisited
Abstract
This book, authored by two leading scholars of the Supreme Court and its policy making, systematically presents and validates the use of the attitudinal model to explain and predict Supreme Court decision making. In the process, it critiques the two major alternative models of Supreme Court decision making and their major variants: the legal and rational choice. Using the US Supreme Court Data Base, the justices' private papers, and other sources of information, the book analyzes the appointment process, certiorari, the decision on the merits, opinion assignments, and the formation of opinion coalitions. The book will be the definitive presentation of the attitudinal model as well as an authoritative critique of the legal and rational choice models. The book thoroughly reflects research done since the 1993 publication of its predecessor, as well as decisions and developments in the Supreme Court, including the momentous decision of Bush v. Gore.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
A general approach for predicting the behavior of the Supreme Court of the United States
Katz, D. M., Bommarito, M. J., & Blackman, J. (2017) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0174698 · Cited by 528
On the Ideological Foundations of Supreme Court Legitimacy in the American Public
Bartels, B. L., & Johnston, C. D. (2013) · American Journal of Political Science · doi:10.1111/j.1540-5907.2012.00616.x · Cited by 349
Polarization: What Everyone Needs to Know®
McCarty, N. (2019) · doi:10.1093/wentk/9780190867782.001.0001 · Cited by 280
Harris, A. P., & Sen, M. (2019) · Annual Review of Political Science · doi:10.1146/annurev-polisci-051617-090650 · Cited by 152
Prosecuting from the bench? Examining sources of pro‐prosecution bias in judges
Berryessa, C. M., Dror, I. E., & McCormack, C. J. B. (2023) · Legal and Criminological Psychology · doi:10.1111/lcrp.12226 · Cited by 28
Metadata
- Authors
- Segal, J. A., & Spaeth, H. J.
- Venue
- Cambridge University Press eBooks
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press
- Published
- 2002-09-16
- OpenAlex
- W4299614237
- Cited by
- 1,165
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 50.58
- Type
- book
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model Revisited. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1017/cbo9780511615696
- The paper
- Segal, J. A., & Spaeth, H. J. (2002). The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model Revisited. Cambridge University Press eBooks. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511615696
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
