Judging in a ‘Different Voice’: Gender and the Sentencing of Violent Offences in Israel

Bogoch, Bryna

doi:10.1006/ijsl.1999.0081

Cited by 9 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 55 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Whether these perceptions and beliefs translate into practice is impossible to know (cf. Bogoch 1999;Steffensmeier and Hebert 1999). Yet, if women's experiences differ from men's and if women's experiences with gender bias shape their consciousness, the legal system may well change if women are equally represented among its most-valued participants, especially women of color with experiences of both sexism and racism that foster a critical feminist and race-conscious awareness (Lazos 1999).…”

Section: Martin Reynolds and Keithmentioning

confidence: 96%

Gender Bias and Feminist Consciousness among Judges and Attorneys: A Standpoint Theory Analysis

Martin¹,

Reynolds²,

Keith³

2002

Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.. The University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Signs.

show abstract

Section: Martin Reynolds and Keithmentioning

confidence: 96%

Gender Bias and Feminist Consciousness among Judges and Attorneys: A Standpoint Theory Analysis

Martin¹,

Reynolds²,

Keith³

2002

Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Women-including congresspeople (Miller and Sutherland 2023) and witnesses (Mattei 1998)-are interrupted more than men during congressional hearings (but see Kathlene 1994). In courts, female judges, justices, and lawyers are interrupted more than men (Bogoch 1999;Cortina et al 2002;Feldman and Gill 2019;Jacobi and Schweers 2017;Patton and Smith 2017).…”

Section: Race and Gender Biasmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gender, Race, and Interruptions at Supreme Court Confirmation Hearings

BOYD,

COLLINS,

RINGHAND

2024

Am Polit Sci Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this research letter, we examine whether gender and racial bias affect interruption rates at one of the most visible events in American politics: US Supreme Court confirmation hearings. Using original data from 1939 to 2022, we find that male and white participants are more likely to interrupt women and person of color speakers, respectively, relative to male and white speakers. This finding holds for both senators and nominees as interrupters. Our results provide evidence that biased interruptive behavior occurs in even the most public and salient of political settings and that it can be mitigated (or intensified) by shared (or opposite) partisanship among speaking pairs. We also find interruption inequalities are not isolated to women as the interrupted, revealing that people of color in political and legal settings are subject to heightened rates of interruptions as well.

show abstract

“…Nearly no attention has been granted to gender disparities in the Israeli justice system and any that has focuses on the civil arena (Bogoch ; Bogoch & Don‐Yechiya ; Ajzenstadt & Steinberg ; Eisenberg et al ). In a study performed by Bogoch and Don‐Yechiya (), a quantitative analysis of 1,800 criminal cases revealed that female defendants represented only a small percentage of the defendant population.…”

Section: Gender‐based Biases In Judicial Decisionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

He Paid, She Paid: Exploiting Israeli Courts' Rulings on Litigation Costs to Explore Gender Biases

Fisher

Kricheli‐Katz

Rosen-Zvi

et al. 2016

J Empirical Legal Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study documents gender disparities in litigation‐cost rulings in Israel. It expands on the existing literature on judicial bias in at least two important ways: by controlling for the merits of the cases and by focusing on civil litigation. The first improvement is methodological. The unique Israeli regime of litigation costs allows us to control for the merit of the cases, as well as for other typically unobservable variables, and thus to isolate and observe judicial bias. The second improvement on the existing literature on judicial bias involves focusing on outcome disparities in the civil (rather than criminal) justice system. Although numerous studies explore gender‐based disparities in the criminal justice sphere, only a very small number of studies explore such disparities in the civil arena. We found clear disparities in the allocation of litigation costs between men and women. Male plaintiffs who lost were ordered to pay the winners' legal fees more often than were losing women as sole plaintiffs or as part of all‐women plaintiff groups. Likewise, the fees women plaintiffs who lost a case were obliged to pay were less than those required of losing men, and women defendants who won cases received higher fee awards than similarly situated men.

show abstract

Judging in a ‘Different Voice’: Gender and the Sentencing of Violent Offences in Israel

Cited by 9 publications

References 55 publications

Gender Bias and Feminist Consciousness among Judges and Attorneys: A Standpoint Theory Analysis

Gender Bias and Feminist Consciousness among Judges and Attorneys: A Standpoint Theory Analysis

Gender, Race, and Interruptions at Supreme Court Confirmation Hearings

He Paid, She Paid: Exploiting Israeli Courts' Rulings on Litigation Costs to Explore Gender Biases

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About