Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 7
Figure 8
Figure 9
Figure 10
Figure 11
Figure 12
Figure 13
Figure 14
The Conditional Impact of Supreme Court Nominee Conscientiousness and Senator Party Affiliation on Forthcomingness to Hearing Questions_
| Predictor | Nominee Forthcomingness |
|---|---|
| Percentage Questions on Views | −.007* (.003) |
| Percentage Questions on Civil Liberties | −.008* (.003) |
| Ideological Distance: Senator-Nominee | −.489* (.287) |
| Time Trend | .085* (.037) |
| Time Trend Squared | −.002* (.001) |
| Number of Questions | −.002+ (.002) |
| Divided Government | .688* (.189) |
| Qualifications | .660* (.271) |
| Nominee different party than senator | −.563* (.193) |
| Conscientiousness | .255* (.109) |
| Conscientiousness X Nominee different party | −.315* (.135) |
| Openness to Experience | −.117* (.070) |
| Extraversion | .009 (.072) |
| Agreeableness | −.241* (.129) |
| Neuroticism | −.040 (.105) |
| Constant | .850* (.430) |
The Conditional Impact of Nominee Conscientiousness with Senator Party Affiliation and Nominee Qualifications on Senators’ Votes in Committee_
| Predictor | Senator Vote |
|---|---|
| Nominee Responsiveness | .043* (.009) |
| Number of questions | −.036* (.008) |
| Ideological Distance: Senator-Nominee | −4.047* (1.382) |
| Divided Government | 1.025* (.482) |
| Television Era | 2.138* (.891) |
| Interest group support | .085* (.027) |
| Conscientiousness | 3.921* (1.541) |
| Nominee Different Party | −5.604+ (3.599) |
| Conscientiousness X Nominee Different Party | −1.835 (1.626) |
| Qualifications | 4.398* (1.7049) |
| Conscientiousness X Qualifications | −3.113* (1.163) |
| Openness to Experience | −.016 (.285) |
| Extraversion | .115 (.287) |
| Agreeableness | .279 (.278) |
| Neuroticism | .762* (.286) |
| Constant | 1.348 (3.712) |