The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
“Accountability, Quantification, and Law
Abstract
Accountability can mean many things, but increasingly it is linked to quantification. This is true in many fields, including law. This review considers how the recent emphasis on quantitative accountability has influenced law and legal practices. Rather than offering a broad survey of quantitative techniques deployed in law, the article examines three legal contexts in which quantification has shaped how actors are held accountable: sentencing guidelines, cost-benefit analysis in regulation, and law school rankings. The conditions that promote rigorous quantification, its effects on professional discretion, relations of authority, and resistance are examined. The article suggests fruitful questions and strategies for analyzing more broadly the effects of quantification in law.
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Yet it soon turned out that instead of eliminating discretion, the sentencing guidelines led to a displacement of discretion.”
From Technologies of Crime Prediction: The Reception of Algorithms in Policing and Criminal Courts (2021) · cites this paper as Espeland and Vannebo 2007
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
Cites
Hutchins, E. (1995) · doi:10.7551/mitpress/1881.001.0001 · Cited by 10,801
Miller, P., & Rose, N. (1990) · Economy and Society · doi:10.1080/03085149000000001 · Cited by 2,877 · cited 1×
“Numbers circulate easily and make possible “government at a distance” (Miller & Rose 1990, p. 9).”
BackgroundAlbonetti, C. A. (1997) · Law & Society Review · doi:10.2307/3053987 · Cited by 459
Population Growth in U. S. Prisons, 1980-1996
Blumstein, A., & Beck, A. J. (1999) · Crime and Justice · doi:10.1086/449294 · Cited by 312
Research works printed but not linked: 54
- 10.2307/3312947 · DOI
- 10.1086/467426 · DOI
- Bagley N, 2006, Columbia Law Rev, 106, 1260
- 10.1525/fsr.2003.15.3.160 · DOI
- Bowman FO, 1996, Wis. Law Rev., 1996, 679
- Bowman FO, 2005, Columbia Law Rev., 105, 1315
- Bowman FO, 2001, Iowa Law Rev., 86, 1043
- Cohen PC, 1984, A Calculating People: The Spread of Numeracy in Early America
- 10.2307/797455 · DOI
- 10.7326/0003-4819-124-2-199601150-00007 · DOI
- 10.1177/1077558706288831 · DOI
- Espeland WN, 1998, The Struggle for Water: Politics, Rationality and Identity in the American Southwest
- 10.1146/annurev.soc.24.1.313 · DOI
- 10.2307/3481429 · DOI
- Frankel ME, 1973, Criminal Sentences: Law Without Order
- 10.2307/796945 · DOI
- 10.2307/3380247 · DOI
- 10.2307/3312946 · DOI
- Heimer CA, 1998, For the Sake of the Children. The Social Organization of Responsibility in the Hospital and the Home.
- Heinzerling L, 2000, Harvard Environ. Law Rev., 24, 189
- 10.2307/1144166 · DOI
- Hoffer TB, 2000, Handbook of the Sociology of Education, 529
- 10.2307/796964 · DOI
- 10.2307/976998 · DOI
- Lutter R. 2000.Valuing children's health: a reassessment of the benefits of lower lead levels. Work. Pap. No. 00–2, AEI Brookings Joint Cent. Regul. Stud. · DOI
- 10.1017/CBO9780511528279 · DOI
- Miller ML, 2004, Stanford Law Rev., 56, 1211
- 10.1086/320276 · DOI
- 10.2307/1143685 · DOI
- 10.1001/archinte.165.1.83 · DOI
- Natl. Comm. Excellence Educ., 1983, A Nation at Risk: The Imperative for Educational Reform.
- Natl. Res. Counc. Comm. Rev. OMB Risk Assess. Bull., 2007, Scientific Review of the Proposed Risk Assessment Bulletin from the Office of Management and Budget, Executive Summary.
- 10.2307/40252332 · DOI
- Porter TM, 1995, Trust in Numbers: The Pursuit of Objectivity in Science and Public Life.
- 10.2307/3312945 · DOI
- Power M, 1997, The Audit Society: Rituals of Verification
- 10.1111/j.1467-9930.2003.00147.x · DOI
- 10.1080/0268093032000124848 · DOI
- 10.1146/annurev.lawsocsci.2.081805.105900 · DOI
- Sauder M, Espeland WN, 2006, Indiana Law J., 81, 205
- 10.2307/2661148 · DOI
- Shore C, Wright S. 2000. Coercive accountability: the rise of audit culture in higher education. See Strathern 2000, pp.57–89
- Stith K, 1998, Fear of Judging: Sentencing Guidelines in the Federal Courts
- Strathern M, 1996, Cambridge Anthropol., 19, 1
- 10.4324/9780203449721 · DOI
- 10.2307/1229364 · DOI
- 10.1086/468105 · DOI
- Tonry M, 1996, Sentencing Matters
- Tonry M, 2005, Stanford Law Rev., 58, 37
- Trott S, 1995, Fed. Sentencing Report., 8, 199
- U.S. Sentencing Commission., 2004, Fifteen Years of Guidelines Sentencing: An Assessment of How Well the Federal Criminal Justice System Is Achieving the Goals of Sentencing Reform
- 10.2307/1123441 · DOI
- Weidenbaum M, 1997, Regulation, 20, 20
- Williams R, 1976, Keywords: A Vocabulary of Culture and Society
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Espeland, W. N., & Stevens, M. L. (2008) · European Journal of Sociology · doi:10.1017/s0003975609000150 · Cited by 1,265
Self-citationAlgorithms in practice: Comparing web journalism and criminal justice
Christin, A. (2017) · Big Data & Society · doi:10.1177/2053951717718855 · Cited by 379
Predict and Surveil: Data, Discretion, and the Future of Policing
Brayne, S. (2020) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780190684099.001.0001 · Cited by 334
Technologies of Crime Prediction: The Reception of Algorithms in Policing and Criminal Courts
Brayne, S., & Christin, A. (2021) · Social Problems · doi:10.1093/socpro/spaa004 · Cited by 279
Algorithmic Impact Assessments and Accountability: The Co-construction of Impacts
Metcalf, J., Moss, E., Watkins, E. A., Singh, R., & Elish, M. C. (2021) · Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency · doi:10.1145/3442188.3445935 · Cited by 195
Metadata
- Authors
- Espeland, W. N., & Vannebo, B. I.
- Affiliations
- Department of Sociology, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois 60208;,
- Venue
- Annual Review of Law and Social Science
- Publisher
- Annual Reviews
- Published
- 2007-12-01
- Volume
- 3
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 21-43
- ISSN
- 1550-3585
- 1550-3631
- Cited by
- 78
- References
- 4
- Language
- en
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
