The public's conditional response to Supreme Court decisions

Timothy R. Johnson, Andrew D. Martin

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

58 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

To investigate the effect of the Supreme Court on public opinion, we offer the conditional response hypothesis based on a theory of Supreme Court legitimacy and a microlevel social-psychological theory of attitude formation. Together these theories predict that the Court may affect public opinion when it initially rules on a salient issue, but that subsequent decisions on the same issue will have little influence on opinion. To test our predictions, we analyze public opinion data before and after the Supreme Court ruled in a highly visible abortion case (Webster v. Reproductive Health Services [1989]) and before and after three key capital punishment rulings (Furman v. Georgia [1972], Gregg v. Georgia [1976], and McCleskey v. Kemp [1987]). The results suggest that our theory is not issue bound but is generally applicable to how the Supreme Court affects public opinion when it rules in highly salient cases.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)299-309
Number of pages11
JournalAmerican Political Science Review
Volume92
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 1998

Fingerprint

court decision
public opinion
Supreme Court
attitude formation
psychological theory
abortion
penalty
health service
legitimacy

Cite this

The public's conditional response to Supreme Court decisions. / Johnson, Timothy R.; Martin, Andrew D.

In: American Political Science Review, Vol. 92, No. 2, 01.01.1998, p. 299-309.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{e72dba87639c4b099dee0fe57d37b4f5,
title = "The public's conditional response to Supreme Court decisions",
abstract = "To investigate the effect of the Supreme Court on public opinion, we offer the conditional response hypothesis based on a theory of Supreme Court legitimacy and a microlevel social-psychological theory of attitude formation. Together these theories predict that the Court may affect public opinion when it initially rules on a salient issue, but that subsequent decisions on the same issue will have little influence on opinion. To test our predictions, we analyze public opinion data before and after the Supreme Court ruled in a highly visible abortion case (Webster v. Reproductive Health Services [1989]) and before and after three key capital punishment rulings (Furman v. Georgia [1972], Gregg v. Georgia [1976], and McCleskey v. Kemp [1987]). The results suggest that our theory is not issue bound but is generally applicable to how the Supreme Court affects public opinion when it rules in highly salient cases.",
author = "Johnson, {Timothy R.} and Martin, {Andrew D.}",
year = "1998",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.2307/2585665",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "92",
pages = "299--309",
journal = "American Political Science Review",
issn = "0003-0554",
publisher = "Cambridge University Press",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The public's conditional response to Supreme Court decisions

AU - Johnson, Timothy R.

AU - Martin, Andrew D.

PY - 1998/1/1

Y1 - 1998/1/1

N2 - To investigate the effect of the Supreme Court on public opinion, we offer the conditional response hypothesis based on a theory of Supreme Court legitimacy and a microlevel social-psychological theory of attitude formation. Together these theories predict that the Court may affect public opinion when it initially rules on a salient issue, but that subsequent decisions on the same issue will have little influence on opinion. To test our predictions, we analyze public opinion data before and after the Supreme Court ruled in a highly visible abortion case (Webster v. Reproductive Health Services [1989]) and before and after three key capital punishment rulings (Furman v. Georgia [1972], Gregg v. Georgia [1976], and McCleskey v. Kemp [1987]). The results suggest that our theory is not issue bound but is generally applicable to how the Supreme Court affects public opinion when it rules in highly salient cases.

AB - To investigate the effect of the Supreme Court on public opinion, we offer the conditional response hypothesis based on a theory of Supreme Court legitimacy and a microlevel social-psychological theory of attitude formation. Together these theories predict that the Court may affect public opinion when it initially rules on a salient issue, but that subsequent decisions on the same issue will have little influence on opinion. To test our predictions, we analyze public opinion data before and after the Supreme Court ruled in a highly visible abortion case (Webster v. Reproductive Health Services [1989]) and before and after three key capital punishment rulings (Furman v. Georgia [1972], Gregg v. Georgia [1976], and McCleskey v. Kemp [1987]). The results suggest that our theory is not issue bound but is generally applicable to how the Supreme Court affects public opinion when it rules in highly salient cases.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0032091362&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0032091362&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.2307/2585665

DO - 10.2307/2585665

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:0032091362

VL - 92

SP - 299

EP - 309

JO - American Political Science Review

JF - American Political Science Review

SN - 0003-0554

IS - 2

ER -