Judicial Specialization and Ideological Decision Making in the US Courts of Appeals

2015 ◽  
Vol 40 (01) ◽  
pp. 29-50 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brett Curry ◽  
Banks Miller
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Subject Matter ◽  
Courts Of Appeals ◽  
Subject Matter Experts ◽  
The Us ◽  
Subject Matter Expertise ◽  
Potent Factor

We investigate the influence of subject matter expertise, opinion specialization, and judicial experience on the role of ideology in decision making in the courts of appeals in a generalized, as opposed to specialized, setting. We find that subject matter experts and opinion specialists are significantly more likely to engage in ideological decision making than their nonspecialist counterparts and that opinion specialization is a particularly potent factor in ideological decision making. Further, increased judicial experience has no effect on the conditional use of ideology. We discuss the potentially wide‐ranging implications of our findings for both theory and policy.

Experts Judging Experts: The Role of Expertise in Reviewing Agency Decision Making

2013 ◽  
Vol 38 (01) ◽  
pp. 55-71 ◽  
Author(s):  
Banks Miller ◽  
Brett Curry
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Subject Matter ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Court Of Appeals ◽  
Subject Matter Expertise ◽  
Federal Circuit

What role does judicial subject matter expertise play in the review of agency decisions? Using a data set of decisions in which the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (BPAI) is reviewed by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, we investigate this question and find that greater subject matter expertise does make it more likely that a judge will vote to reverse an agency decision.

Expertise Fails to Attenuate Gendered Biases in Judicial Decision-Making

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 227-234 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrea L. Miller
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Gender Ideology ◽  
Controlled Experiments ◽  
Judicial Decision ◽  
Trial Court ◽  
Judicial Decision Making ◽  
Legal Decision Making ◽  
Subject Matter Expertise ◽  
Relative Differences

Although the influence of gender ideology on lay decision-making has been established, it is not known to what extent expertise may mitigate gendered biases and improve decision-making quality. In a set of controlled experiments, trial court judges and laypeople evaluated a hypothetical child custody case and a hypothetical employment discrimination case. The role of expertise was tested in two ways: by comparing judges’ and laypeople’s decision-making and by examining relative differences in expertise among judges. Judges were no less influenced by litigant gender and by their own gender ideology than the lay sample. Judges with greater subject-matter expertise were also no less influenced by gender ideology than other judges. In some cases, expertise was associated with greater, not less, bias. The results of this study suggest that expertise does not attenuate gendered biases in legal decision-making.

scholarly journals Unwanted Conflict? The Analysis of the Impact of Misperception, Beliefs and Psychology of President Nasser at the Outbreak of the Six Day War

2019 ◽  
Vol 01 (02) ◽  
pp. 1950003
Author(s):  
Janko Šćepanović
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Structural Explanation ◽  
Defining Moments ◽  
The Us ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Six Day War ◽  
The Impact

The Six Day War was one of the most defining moments in the history of the Modern Middle East. This paper seeks to add to the existing scholarship on the subject by going beyond the structural explanation. It gives special attention to the role of unit-level variables like perception, personality, and political psychology of decision-makers. As one scholar noted, threats are not perceived in a vacuum, and are, instead, products of complex synthesis of subjective appraisal of events by the decision-makers. The focus will be on the beliefs and perceptions of the most impactful actor in this crisis: Egyptian President Nasser. As will be argued, his decision-making was shaped by his experience with foreign imperialism, a general misconception of super power intentions, an incorrect analogy between two crucial crisis situations with Israel: the February 1960 Rotem Crisis, and the build-up to the June War in 1967, and especially his complicated relations with the US leaders.

scholarly journals Validity and reliability of physical employment standards

2016 ◽  
Vol 41 (6 (Suppl. 2)) ◽  
pp. S83-S91 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gemma S. Milligan ◽  
Tara J. Reilly ◽  
Bruno D. Zumbo ◽  
Michael J. Tipton
Keyword(s):  
Subject Matter ◽  
Subject Matter Experts ◽  
Validity And Reliability ◽  
Test Selection ◽  
Physical Test ◽  
Levels Of Evidence ◽  
Employment Standards

In this paper the role of validity and reliability in the development of physical employment standards (PESs) and the consideration of these factors in determining the final pass/fail criteria for a PES and ultimately the legal defensibility of a PES is examined. Particular attention is paid to the use of subject-matter experts, the levels of evidence used in the establishment of the minimum acceptable pace/intensity for the completion of critical tasks, and the considerations needed in physical test selection.

Buying subject-matter expertise: an innovative approach to business classes

2020 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Philip English ◽  
Rachel Gordon
Keyword(s):  
Student Learning ◽  
Subject Matter ◽  
Course Design ◽  
Technical Problem ◽  
Time Frame ◽  
Quality Analysis ◽  
Subject Matter Experts ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Subject Matter Expertise ◽  
The Subject

PurposeThis paper introduces a new instructional design for executive programs that combined a flipped classroom methodology and experiential learning to address the challenge of teaching highly technical material in a compressed time frame. In practice, when decision-making executives lack technical expertise and face a highly technical problem, they contract for subject-matter expertise (SME) within the firm or through hiring consultants. The authors show how this can be done in a classroom setting to enhance the learning experience.Design/methodology/approachThe classroom approach utilizes students from other programs as analysts for executive MBA (EMBA) teams faced with case analysis that involves technical issues in finance. The analysts act as subject-matter experts for the EMBA students.FindingsExecutive student learning is not eroded by relying on the analysts, and, moreover, the use of analysts enhances EMBA student understandingPractical implicationsExecutives are able, in a short time frame, to produce high quality analysis by utilizing the subject-matter experts. Executives also learn how to ask the right questions and evaluate the quality of the analysis created by the subject-matter experts. The subject-matter experts, who are also students, derive added benefits of an employment experience in finance, learning how to interpret instructions about the analysis and how to respond to feedback.Originality/valueThe paper illustrates a new course design where the course's technical analysis aspects mimic work environments enhancing student learning.

scholarly journals HoloMentor: A Novel Mixed Reality Surgical Anatomy Curriculum for Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zoe-Athena Papalois ◽  
Abdullatif Aydın ◽  
Azhar Khan ◽  
Evangelos Mazaris ◽  
Anand Sivaprakash Rathnasamy Muthusamy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Virtual Reality ◽  
Subject Matter ◽  
Technical Skills ◽  
Surgical Anatomy ◽  
Imperial College ◽  
Subject Matter Experts ◽  
Surgical Decision ◽  
King's College ◽  
Surgical Decision Making

ABSTRACT Objectives: The disruption to surgical training and medical education caused by the global COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the need for realistic, reliable, and engaging educational opportunities available outside of the operating theatre and accessible for trainees of all levels. This paper presents the design and development of a virtual reality curriculum which simulates the surgical mentorship experience outside of the operating theatre, with a focus on surgical anatomy and surgical decision making. Method: This was a multi-institutional study between London’s King’s College and Imperial College. The index procedure selected for the module was robotic radical prostatectomy. For each stage of the surgical procedure, subject-matter experts (N=3) at King’s College London, identified: (1) the critical surgical-decision making points, (2) critical anatomical landmarks and (3) tips and techniques for overcoming intraoperative challenges. Content validity was determined by an independent panel of subject-matter experts (N=8) at Imperial College, London using Fleiss’ Kappa statistic. The experts’ teaching points were combined with operative footage and illustrative animations and projected onto a virtual reality headset. The module was piloted to Surgical Science students (N=15). Quantitative analysis compared participants' confidence regarding their anatomical knowledge before and after taking the module. Qualitative data was gathered from students regarding their views on using the virtual reality model. Results: Multi-rater agreement between experts was above the 70.0% threshold for all steps of the procedure. 73% of pilot study participants ‘agreed’ or ‘strongly agreed’ that they achieved a better understanding of surgical anatomy and the rationale behind each procedural step. This was reflected in an increase in the median knowledge score after trialing the curriculum (p<0.001). 100% of subject-matter experts and 93.3% of participants ‘agreed’ or ‘strongly agreed’ that virtual mentorship would be useful for future surgical training. Conclusions: This study demonstrated that virtual surgical mentorship could be a feasible and cost-effective alternative to traditional training methods with the potential to improve technical skills, such as operative proficiency and non-technical skills such as decision-making and situational judgement.  

scholarly journals THE ROLE OF RELATIONSHIP POWER IN COUPLE DECISIONS ABOUT CONTRACEPTION IN THE US

2010 ◽  
Vol 42 (3) ◽  
pp. 307-323 ◽  
Author(s):  
WILLIAM R. GRADY ◽  
DANIEL H. KLEPINGER ◽  
JOHN O. G. BILLY ◽  
LISA A. CUBBINS
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Relationship Power ◽  
Heterosexual Relationships ◽  
Dating Relationships ◽  
Power Sources ◽  
Method Choice ◽  
Multiple Dimensions ◽  
The Us ◽  
Dating Couples

SummaryMost analyses of the contraceptive decision-making in which couples engage are based on the reports of only one partner, usually the female partner. This study uses information from the 2006 National Couples Survey conducted in the US, which was obtained from both partners in intimate heterosexual relationships to investigate the relative impact of the male and female partner's method preferences on the type of method they use together. It also investigates the extent to which differences in power between the partners, measured on multiple dimensions, may weigh the decision-making process toward one partner or the other. The results suggest that men's and women's method preferences are both significantly related to the couples' method choice. Further, there is no evidence of a significant gender difference in the magnitude of these relationships, although women in married and cohabiting relationships appear to have greater power over method choice than women in dating relationships. The analysis also finds that structural power as measured by relative education and income affects partner differences in the relationship between preferences and method choice, but is more important for married and cohabiting couples than for dating couples. In contrast, relationship-based power sources, including relative commitment and relative relationship alternatives, have significant effects only for dating couples.

scholarly journals Challenges in the Development of e-Quit worRx: An iPad App for Smoking Cessation Counseling and Shared Decision Making in Primary Care (Preprint)

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles R Doarn ◽  
Mary Beth Vonder Meulen ◽  
Harini Pallerla ◽  
Shauna P Acquavita ◽  
Saundra Regan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Smoking Cessation ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Subject Matter ◽  
Iterative Process ◽  
The United States ◽  
Mobile App ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Subject Matter Experts

BACKGROUND Smoking is the leading preventable cause of morbidity and mortality in the United States, killing more than 450,000 Americans. Primary care physicians (PCPs) have a unique opportunity to discuss smoking cessation evidence in a way that enhances patient-initiated change and quit attempts. Patients today are better equipped with technology such as mobile devices than ever before. OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to evaluate the challenges in developing a tablet-based, evidence-based smoking cessation app to optimize interaction for shared decision making between PCPs and their patients who smoke. METHODS A group of interprofessional experts developed content and a graphical user interface for the decision aid and reviewed these with several focus groups to determine acceptability and usability in a small population. RESULTS Using a storyboard methodology and subject matter experts, a mobile app, e-Quit worRx, was developed through an iterative process. This iterative process helped finalize the content and ergonomics of the app and provided valuable feedback from both patients and provider teams. Once the app was made available, other technical and programmatic challenges arose. CONCLUSIONS Subject matter experts, although generally amenable to one another’s disciplines, are often challenged with effective interactions, including language, scope, clinical understanding, technology awareness, and expectations. The successful development of this app and its evaluation in a clinical setting highlighted those challenges and reinforced the need for effective communications and team building.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document