Electing to Trust: An Exploration of the Relationship between Public Opinion and Localized Processes on Judicial Selection

Abstract

<jats:p>Public trust in government depends largely on the belief that institutions are fair and respond to the will of the governed. We expand on past research on the relationship between public opinion and state courts by studying how selection methods for both state and local courts influence popular attitudes about the judicial branch. Employing individual-level survey data on the responsiveness and fairness of state supreme courts and local trial courts, we find that respondents in states using elections to choose judges for state courts believe the judicial system is fairer. Further, the use of non-partisan elections for local trial courts has a positive effect on public evaluations of judicial fairness. However, views on judicial responsiveness are unaffected by means of selection at either the state or local level. Thus, nonpartisan or even partisan judicial elections do not have a negative effect on our measures of trust; indeed, when elections do have an effect, it is a positive one.</jats:p>

A comprehensive view of trust in education: Conclusions from a systematic literature review

“…In this respect, however, the literature review provides some interesting differentiations, as several studies highlight the fact that the link between trust and education depends on country‐level contextual factors. A common theme in the literature is that the positive association between education and generalised trust is generally found in democratic, non‐corrupt countries (Peterson et al ., 2012) and in countries whose citizens have strong egalitarian attitudes (Medve‐Bálint & Boda, 2014). Furthermore, trust is higher in wealthier countries (Koster, 2013).…”

Motivating Cooperation and Compliance with Authority

“…The often negative infl uence of court experience on trust is to some observers associated with the high expectations that the public holds of the judiciary, which, when tested during direct experience, diminishes the perceived fairness and responsiveness of courts (Peterson et al, 2012 ). More generally, experience is tested against the normative expectations of the public.…”