Abstract
This paper reports on the design of a study using pro- cedures of modified analytic induction to investigate how courtroom procedures followed or did not follow child support guidelines. Using concepts from principles of procedural fairness and distribu- tive justice, the research team coded transcripts of public hearings on child support guidelines. This paper reports on work in progress and does not report results or conclusions. The coded examples of justiceprinciples demonstrate how procedures of modified analytic induc- tion lead to the refinement of conceptual definitions when tested against lived experiences.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 193-222 |
| Number of pages | 30 |
| Journal | Marriage and Family Review |
| Volume | 24 |
| Issue number | 1-2 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Feb 15 1997 |
Bibliographical note
Funding Information:The study was funded by The Minnesota Agricultural Experiment Station, Project 52-054, ‘‘Justice Principles in Divorce Decision Procedures and Resource Allocations,’’ Kathryn D. Rettig, Principal Investigator; and The McKnight, Bush, Bigelow, St. Paul, and Emma B. Howe Foundations. Interpretations of the results are the responsibilities of the authors and do not represent views of funding agencies.
Keywords
- Child support
- Con- gruence
- Distributive justice
- Hermeneutics
- Induction
- Qualitative research