Skip to main content
Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Exploring Court Performance and Developing its Scale Cover

Exploring Court Performance and Developing its Scale

Open Access
|Apr 2022

References

  1. Bełdowski, J., Dąbroś, Ł., & Wojciechowski, W. Judges and court performance: a case study of district commercial courts in Poland, European Journal of Law and Economics, 2020, 131. DOI: 10.1007/s10657-020-09656-4
  2. Bureau of Justice Assistance, Trial Court Performance Standards with Commentary, 2015.
  3. Castro, ASD, An Assessment of the impact of the reform of extrajudicial executive titles (Law No. 11,382/2006), 2015.
  4. Dakolias, M., The judicial sector in Latin America and the Caribbean: elements of reform, The World Bank, 1996. DOI: 10.1596/0-8213-3612-6
  5. de Oliveira Gomes, A., de Aquino Guimaraes, T., & L. Akutsu, The relationship between judicial staff and court performance: Evidence from Brazilian State Courts, IJCA, 2016, Vol. 8, p. 12. DOI: 10.18352/ijca.214
  6. Demirovic, A., Jasarevic, A., & A.H. Berg, Court Performance Management, 2016.
  7. Dimitrova-Grajzl, V., Grajzl, P., Sustersic, J., & K. Zajc, Court output, judicial staffing, and the demand for court services: Evidence from Slovenian courts of the first instance. International Review of Law and Economics, 2012, 32(1), 1929. DOI: 10.1016/j.irle.2011.12.006
  8. Doll, W. J., & G. Torkzadeh, The measurement of end-user computing satisfaction, MIS quarterly, 1988, 259274. DOI: 10.2307/248851
  9. Etezadi-Amoli, J., & A.F. Farhoomand, A structural model of end user computing satisfaction and user performance, Information & management, 1996, 30(2), 6573. DOI: 10.1016/0378-7206(95)00052-6
  10. Garcia, F. S, The Nature of Judicial Reform in Latin America and Some Strategic Considerations, American University International Law Review, 1997, 13, 1267.
  11. García-Posada, M., & J.S. Mora-Sanguinetti, Entrepreneurship and enforcement institutions: Disaggregated evidence for Spain. European Journal of Law and Economics, 2015, 40(1), 4974. DOI: 10.1007/s10657-014-9470-z
  12. Glanfield, L., Hall, D., & J. Marie, International framework for court excellence, International Consortium for Court Excellence, 2013 <http://www.courtexcellence.com/~/media/Microsites/Files/ICCE/The%20International%20Framework%202E,202014>[assessed 3 July 2021]
  13. Guest, G., Bunce, A., & L. Johnson, How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field methods, 2006, 18(1), 5982. DOI: 10.1177/1525822X05279903
  14. Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J. and R.E. Anderson, Multivariate Data Analysis: A Global Perspective, 7th ed., Pearson Education, Upper Saddle River, NJ, 2010.
  15. Hinkin, T. R., A review of scale development practices in the study of organizations, Journal of management, 1995, 21(5), 967988. DOI: 10.1177/014920639502100509
  16. International Framework for Court Excellence (IFCE), 3rd Edition. (2020) <https://www.courtexcellence.comInte/__data/assets/pdf_file/0015/53124/The-International-Framework-3E-2020-V2.pdf>[assessed 24 March 2021]
  17. Johnsen, Evaluation of European Judicial Systems, 2014.
  18. Johnsen, J. T., The European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice Reforming European Justice Systems–’Mission Impossible?’, International Journal for Court Administration, 2012, 4(3). DOI: 10.18352/ijca.83
  19. Keilitz, I., Glanfield, L., & Hall, D., Global Measures of Court Performance Brief Version (Rep.),2020 <http://www.courtexcellence.com/__data/assets/pdf_file/0030/54795/GLOBAL-MEASURES-3rd-Edition-Oct-2020.pdf>[15 November 2020]
  20. Kourlis, R. L., & Singer, J. M., A strategy for judicial performance evaluation in New York. Alberta Law Review, 2009, 72, 655.
  21. Lax, J. R., The new judicial politics of legal doctrine, Annual Review of Political Science, 2011, 14, 131157. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.polisci.042108.134842
  22. Lepore, L., Metallo, C., & Agrifoglio, R., Court Management in the Justice System: A Performance Evaluation Model. International Laboratory for the Study of Judicial Systems, 2012, 27.
  23. Nunnally, J.C., Psychometric Theory, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY. 1978.
  24. Oliveira, R. N. d., A Avaliação da produtividade dos juízes federais e as causas limitadoras da prestação jurisdicional, 32(jan/mar), 2005, 5765.
  25. Ostrom, B. J., & Hanson, R. A., Understanding and diagnosing court culture, 2009.
  26. P.M. Frank, Fault diagnosis in dynamic systems using analytical and knowledge-based redundancy: A survey and some new results, Automatica, 1990, 26(3), 459474. DOI: 10.1016/0005-1098(90)90018-D
  27. Pinheiro, A. C., Judiciário e Economia no Brasil. Editora Sumaré, São Paulo, Brazil, 2000.
  28. Prillaman, W. C. The judiciary and democratic decay in Latin America., Westport, CT: Praeger, 2000.
  29. Reno, J., & Dwyer, J. C., Robinson, L., & Gist, N.E., Bureau of Justice Assistance Trial Court Performance Standards, 1997.
  30. Rosales-López, V, Economics of court performance: an empirical analysis, European journal of law and economics, 2008, 25(3), 231251. DOI: 10.1007/s10657-008-9047-9
  31. Sadek, M. T., Magistrados Brasileiros: Caracterização e opiniões, Discussion paper, Associação dos Magistrados Brasileiros, 2005.
  32. Schauffler, R. Y., Judicial accountability in the US State Courts Measuring court performance, Utrecht Law Review, 2007, 3, 112. DOI: 10.18352/ulr.40
  33. Staats, J. L., Bowler, S., & Hiskey, J. T., Measuring judicial performance in Latin America, Latin American Politics and Society, 2005, 47(4), 77106. DOI: 10.1353/lap.2005.0055
  34. Tiller, E. H., & Cross, F. B., What is legal doctrine, Northwestern university law review, 2006, 100, 517. DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.730284
  35. Voigt, S, Determinants of judicial efficiency: a survey, European Journal of Law and Economics, 2016, 42(2), 183208. DOI: 10.1007/s10657-016-9531-6
  36. Williams, B., Onsman, A., & Brown, T, Exploratory factor analysis: A five-step guide for novices, Australasian journal of paramedicine, 2010, 8(3). DOI: 10.33151/ajp.8.3.93
  37. Worthington, R. L., & T. A. Whittaker, Scale development research: A content analysis and recommendations for best practices, Counselling Psychologist, 2006, 34, 806838. DOI: 10.1177/0011000006288127
DOI: https://doi.org/10.36745/ijca.399 | Journal eISSN: 2156-7964
Language: English
Page range: 3 - 3
Published on: Apr 22, 2022
Published by: International Association for Court Administration
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services

© 2022 Dinesh Kumar, Ram Manohar Singh, published by International Association for Court Administration
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.