HOW GOING TO COURT AFFECTS THE ATTITUDES TOWARDS COURTS

Galma Akdeniz; Seda Kalem

doi:10.18490/sosars.818949

HOW GOING TO COURT AFFECTS THE ATTITUDES TOWARDS COURTS

Öz

The aim of this paper was to explore how different types of experiences with courts shape attitudes towards the courts and the justice system, through a secondary analysis of data collected in 2006-2007 using a nationally representative sample of adult urban population of Turkey. Findings indicate that the attitudes of citizens with prior court experience are less positive than attitudes of those with no such experience. It is argued that a negative attitude towards the courts is the outcome of having an experience with the courts, rather than the other way around. It was found that satisfaction with the court experience positively influenced the attitudes towards courts for those who experienced court as civil and criminal plaintiffs, as well as observers and witnesses, while satisfaction with outcomes had same effect for criminal defendants. It is argued that attitudes towards courts are shaped by two components: The stable base which reflects a general and abstract trust in institutions, and a flexible component which is shaped by the nature of the experience and interaction that one has with the courts.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Kaynakça

REFERENCES Benesh, S. C. (2006). Understanding public confidence in American courts. The Journal of Politics, 68(3), 697-707. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2508.2006.00455.x
Benesh, S. C., & Howell, S. E. (2001). Confidence in the courts: A comparison of users and non-users. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 19(2), 199-214. doi: 10.1002/bsl.437
Bohner G, Schwarz N. (2001). Attitudes, persuasion, and behavior. In: A. Tesser & N. Schwarz (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of social psychology, Vol. 1: Intraindividual processes (413-435). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
Breckler, S. J. (1984). Empirical validation of affect, behavior, and cognition as distinct components of attitude. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 1191-1205. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.47.6.1191
Brunson, R. K. (2007). Police don’t like black people: African-American young men’s accumulated police experiences. Criminology & Public Policy, 8 (1), 71-101. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-9133.2007.00423.x
Bühlmann, M., & Kunz, R. (2011) Confidence in the judiciary: Comparing the independence and legitimacy of judicial systems. West European Politics, 34(2), 317–345. doi: 10.1080/01402382.2011.546576
Casper, J. D. (1978). Having their day in court: Defendant evaluations of the fairness of their treatment. Law & Society Review, 12(2), 237-251. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/3053234
Casper, J. D., Tyler, T., & Fisher, B. (1988). Procedural justice in felony cases. Law & Society Review, 22(3), 483–507. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/3053626?seq=1

Chapman, B., Mirrlees-Black, C., & Brawn, C. (2002). Improving public attitudes to the criminal justice system: The impact of information. Home Office: London. Retrieved from https://www.prisonlegalnews.org/media/publications/home_office_research_study_245_improving_public_attitudes_on_the_criminal_justice_system_2002.pdf
Dammer, H. R., & Erise_Pengelly, V. A. (2016). Diversion. In Encyclopaedia Britannica. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2E7rhL3
Elveriş, I., Jahic, G., & Kalem, S. (2009). Judicial proceedings at Istanbul civil Courts: Parties, cases and process. Istanbul, Turkey: Istanbul Bilgi Ünivesitesi Yayınları.
Ewick, P., & Silbey, S. S. (1998). The common place of law: Stories from everyday life. University of Chicago Press.
Fix-Fierro, H. (2003). Courts, Justice and Efficiency: A socio-legal study of economic rationality in adjudication. Hart Publishing.
Gibson, J. L. (2018). Black and blue: How African Americans judge the U.S. legal system. USA: Oxford University Press.
Grootelaar, H. A. M. (2018). Interacting with procedural justice in courts (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Utrecht , Netherlands: Utrecht University.
Grootelaar, H. A.M, & van den Bos, K. (2018). How litigants in Dutch courtrooms come to trust judges: The role of perceived procedural justice, outcome favorability, and other sociolegal moderators. Law & Society Review, 52(1), 234-268. doi: 10.1111/lasr.12315
Hazzard, A. (1983). Children’s experience with, knowledge of, and attitude toward disabled persons. The Journal of Special Education, 17(2), 131-139. DOI: 10.1177/002246698301700204
Higgins, G. E. & Jordan, K. L. (2005). Race and gender: An examination of the models that explain evaluations of the court system for differences. Criminal Justice Studies, 18(1), 81-97. doi: 10.1080/14786010500071188
Hough, M., Jackson, J., Bradford, B., Myhill, A., & Quinton, P. (2010). Procedural justice, trust, and institutional legitimacy. Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice, 4(3), 203-210. doi: 10.1093/police/paq027
Hough, M., Bradford, B., Jackson, J., & Roberts, J. V. (2013). Attitudes to sentencing and trust in justice: Exploring trends from the crime survey for England and Wales. Ministry of Justice Analytical Series. London, UK: Ministry of Justice. Retrieved from http://eprints.bbk.ac.uk/5195/
Hulst, L., Van den Bos, K., Akkermans, A. J., & Lind, E. A. (2017). On why procedural justice matters in court hearings. Utrecht Law Review, 13 (3), 114-129. doi: 10.18352/ulr.413
Jacquot, S., & Vitale, T. (2014). Law as weapon of the weak? A comparative analysis of legal mobilization by Roma and women's groups at the European level. Journal of European Public Policy, 21(4), 587-604. doi: 10.1080/13501763.2014.887138
Jahic, G. & Kalem, S. (2009). Vatandaşın gözünden mahkemeler: Katılım, tutumlar ve güven. In S. Kalem (Ed.), Adalet Gözet: Yargı sistemi üzerine bir inceleme (27-70). Istanbul, Turkey: İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları.
Jay, G. M., & Willis, S. L. (1992). Influence of direct computer experience on older adults' attitudes toward computers. Journal of Gerontology, 47(4), 250-257. doi: 10.1093/geronj/47.4.P250
Kalem, S. (Ed.). (2009). Adalet Gözet: Yargı sistemi üzerine bir inceleme. Istanbul, Turkey: İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları.
Kalem, S., Jahic, G. & Elveriş, İ. (2008). Justice barometer: Public opinions on courts in Turkey. Istanbul, Turkey: İstanbul Bilgi University Publications.
Kritzer, H. M. & Voelker, J. (1998). Familiarity breeds respect: How Wisconsin citizens view their courts. Judicature, 82(2), 58-64. Retrieved from https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/judica82&div=21&id=&page=
Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988). The social psychology of procedural justice. Springer Science & Business Media.
Lind, E. A., Kulik, C. T., Ambrose, M., & de Vera Park, M. V. (1993). Individual and corporate dispute resolution: Using procedural fairness as a decision heuristic. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38(2), 224-251. doi: 10.2307/2393412
Luhmann, N. (2004). Law as a social system. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press,
Macaulay, S. (1987). Images of law in everyday life: The lessons of school, entertainment, and spectator sports. Law & Society Review, 21(2), 185-218. doi: 10.2307/3053519
Mazer, D. B., & Percival, E. F. (1989). Ideology or experience? The relationships among perceptions, attitudes, and experiences of sexual harassment in university students. Sex roles, 20(3-4), 135-147. doi: 10.1007/BF00287987
McCoy, C., & Jahic, G. (2006). Familiarity breeds respect: Organizing and studying a courtwatch. Justice System Journal, 27(1), 61-70. doi: 10.1080/0098261X.2006.10767787
Merry, S. E. (1990). Getting justice, getting even: Legal consciousness among working-class Americans. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
Ministry of Justice (2018). Justice Statistics 2017. Ankara: T.C. Adalet Bakanlığı, Adli Sicil ve İstatistik Genel Müdürlüğü.
Mondak, J.J., Hurwitz, J., Peffley, M., and Testa, P. (2017). The vicarious bases of perceived injustice. American Journal of Political Science, 61(4), 804-819. doi: 10.1111/ajps.12297
Moorhead, R., Sefton, M., & Scanlan, L. (2007). Just Satisfaction? What Drives Public and Participant Satisfaction with Courts and Tribunals-A Review of Recent Evidence.
What Drives Public and Participant Satisfaction with Courts and Tribunals-A Review of Recent Evidence. [Technical Report]. Crown. Ministry of Justice Research Series 5/08. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.2425127
O'Barr, W. M., & Conley, J. M. (1988). Lay expectations of the civil justice system. Law & Society Review, 22, 137. Retrieved from https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/lwsocrw22&div=10&id=&page=
Olson, J. M., & Zanna, M. P. (1993). Attitudes and attitude change. Annual Review of Psychology, 44(1), 117–154. doi: 10.1146/annurev.ps.44.020193.001001
Pleasence, P., & Balmer, N. (2018). Measuring the accessibility and equality of civil justice. Hague Journal on the Rule of Law, 10(2), 255-294. doi: 10.1007/s40803-018-0079-0
Quinton, P. (2011). The impact of information about crime and policing on public perceptions: The results of a randomised controlled trial. London: National Policing Improvement Agency.
Rosenberg, M. J., & Hovland, C. 1. (1960). Cognitive, affective, and behavioral components of attitude. In M. J. Rosenberg, C. I. Hovland, W. J. McGuire, R. P. Abelson, & J. W. Brehm (Eds.), Attitude organization and change. An analysis of consistency among attitude components (1-14). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press
Rottman, D. B., Hansen, R., Mott, N., & Grimes, L. (2003). Perceptions of the courts in your community: The influence of experience, race, and ethnicity. Williamsburg, VA: National Center for State Courts. Retrieved from https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/201302.pdf
Schwarz, N., & Bohner, G. (2001). The construction of attitudes. In: A. Tesser, & N. Schwarz (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of social psychology, Vol. 1: Intraindividual processes (436-457). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
Silbey, S. S. (2005). After legal consciousness. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 1, 323-368. doi: 10.1146/annurev.lawsocsci.1.041604.115938
Silbey, S. S., & Cavicchi, A. (2005). The common place of law: Transforming matters of concern into the objects of everyday life. In B. Latour, & P. Weibel (Eds.), Making things public: Atmospheres of democracy. ZKM Center for Art and Media Karlsruhe. Cambridge, Massachussetts: The MIT Press.
Sun, I. Y., & Wu, Y. (2006). Citizens' perceptions of the courts: The impact of race, gender, and recent experience. Journal of Criminal Justice, 34(5), 457–467. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2006.09.001
Thibaut, J. W., & Walker, L. (1975). Procedural justice: A psychological analysis. Hilllsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Tunç, A. (2009). Türkiye’de yazılı basının yargıya ilişkin haberleri sunumu. In S. Kalem (Ed.), Adalet Gözet: Yargı sistemi üzerine bir inceleme (117-147). Istanbul, Turkey: İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları.
Turk, A. T. (1976). Law as a weapon in social conflict. Social Problems, 23(3), 276-291. doi: 10.2307/799774
TÜİK (n.d.) Nüfus Projeksiyonları: Yıl Ortası Nüfus. Retrieved 4 December 2019, from http://2018.www.tuik.gov.tr/PreTablo.do?alt_id=1027
Tyler, T. R. (1990). Justice, self-interest, and the legitimacy of legal and political authority. In J. J. Mansbridge (Ed.), Beyond self-interest (171–179). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Tyler, T. R. (2001). Public trust and confidence in legal authorities: What do majority and minority group members want from the law and legal institutions?. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 19(2), 215-235. doi: 10.1002/bsl.438
Tyler, T. R. (2006). Why people obey the law. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Tyler, T. R., & Huo, Y. J. (2002). Trust in the law: Encouraging public cooperation with the police and courts. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
Weber, M. (1958). The three types of legitimate rule (H. Gerth, Trans.). Berkeley Publications in Society and Institutions, 4(1), 1-11.
Wilson, C. (2012). The public and the justice system: Attitudes, drivers and behavior - A literature review. Scottish Government. Retrieved from https://www2.gov.scot/resource/0039/00396342.pdf

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil

Türkçe

Konular

-

Bölüm

Araştırma Makalesi

Yazarlar

Galma Akdeniz
0000-0002-7255-8260
Türkiye

Seda Kalem
0000-0002-2404-9429
Türkiye

Yayımlanma Tarihi

31 Ekim 2020

Gönderilme Tarihi

6 Ocak 2020

Kabul Tarihi

12 Eylül 2020

Yayımlandığı Sayı

Yıl 2020 Cilt: 23 Sayı: 2

DOI

https://doi.org/10.18490/sosars.818949

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA76WH26LY

Kaynak Göster

RIS / Bibtex

APA

Akdeniz, G., & Kalem, S. (2020). HOW GOING TO COURT AFFECTS THE ATTITUDES TOWARDS COURTS. Sosyoloji Araştırmaları Dergisi, 23(2), 1-33. https://doi.org/10.18490/sosars.818949

AMA

1.Akdeniz G, Kalem S. HOW GOING TO COURT AFFECTS THE ATTITUDES TOWARDS COURTS. SAD / JSR. 2020;23(2):1-33. doi:10.18490/sosars.818949

Chicago

Akdeniz, Galma, ve Seda Kalem. 2020. “HOW GOING TO COURT AFFECTS THE ATTITUDES TOWARDS COURTS”. Sosyoloji Araştırmaları Dergisi 23 (2): 1-33. https://doi.org/10.18490/sosars.818949.

EndNote

Akdeniz G, Kalem S (01 Ekim 2020) HOW GOING TO COURT AFFECTS THE ATTITUDES TOWARDS COURTS. Sosyoloji Araştırmaları Dergisi 23 2 1–33.

IEEE

[1]G. Akdeniz ve S. Kalem, “HOW GOING TO COURT AFFECTS THE ATTITUDES TOWARDS COURTS”, SAD / JSR, c. 23, sy 2, ss. 1–33, Eki. 2020, doi: 10.18490/sosars.818949.

ISNAD

Akdeniz, Galma - Kalem, Seda. “HOW GOING TO COURT AFFECTS THE ATTITUDES TOWARDS COURTS”. Sosyoloji Araştırmaları Dergisi 23/2 (01 Ekim 2020): 1-33. https://doi.org/10.18490/sosars.818949.

JAMA

1.Akdeniz G, Kalem S. HOW GOING TO COURT AFFECTS THE ATTITUDES TOWARDS COURTS. SAD / JSR. 2020;23:1–33.

MLA

Akdeniz, Galma, ve Seda Kalem. “HOW GOING TO COURT AFFECTS THE ATTITUDES TOWARDS COURTS”. Sosyoloji Araştırmaları Dergisi, c. 23, sy 2, Ekim 2020, ss. 1-33, doi:10.18490/sosars.818949.

Vancouver

1.Galma Akdeniz, Seda Kalem. HOW GOING TO COURT AFFECTS THE ATTITUDES TOWARDS COURTS. SAD / JSR. 01 Ekim 2020;23(2):1-33. doi:10.18490/sosars.818949

Cited By

Victim Care or Defendant Rights? Assessing Public Attitudes towards Special Measures Designed to Support Vulnerable Witnesses at Trial

Social Sciences

https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci13040198

Expectations versus experience: What do citizens demand when dealing with criminal courts?

Criminology & Criminal Justice

https://doi.org/10.1177/17488958241257854