Ideology, Neutrality, and Self-Deception: What the Supreme Court Says and What the Public Hears

Dan Kahan; Dan Simon; Nicholas Scurich; Tom Tyler; Carolyn Shapiro

Ideology, Neutrality, and Self-Deception: What the Supreme Court Says and What the Public Hears

Dan Kahan
, Dan Simon
, Nicholas Scurich
, Tom Tyler
, Carolyn Shapiro

Yale Law School
USC Gould School of Law
UC-Irvine School of Social Ecology

Research output: Contribution to conference › Presentation › peer-review

Abstract

Presentations on Ideology, Neutrality, and Self-Deception in public cultural cognition in relation to the Supreme Court.

Dan Kahan (Elizabeth K. Dollard Professor of Law and Professor of Psychology, Yale Law School) discusses the parallels between presenting valid science and neutral judicial decision-making to the public and the public's conflicts between expert knowledge and their own pattern recognition. Dan Simon (Richard L. and Maria B. Crutcher Professor of Law and Psychology, USC Gould School of Law) and Nicholas Scurich (Assistant Professor of Psychology & Social Behavior, and Criminology, Law & Society, School of Social Ecology, UC-Irvine) present on judicial reasoning, aporia, and the coherence effect. Tom Tyler (Macklin Fleming Professor of Law and Professor of Psychology, Yale Law School) presents on the deference effect. Carolyn Shapiro (Associate Professor of Law and Director of ISCOTUS, IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law) discusses the impression of neutrality and its shifts in the public eye.

This is the third of five sessions from the Symposium on the Supreme Court and the American Public, hosted by IIT Chicago-Kent's Institute on the Supreme Court of the United States.

Original language	American English
State	Published - Nov 16 2012
Event	The Supreme Court and the American Public: 2012 Chicago-Kent Law Review Symposium - Chicago-Kent College of Law, Chicago, United States Duration: Nov 15 2012 → Nov 16 2012 https://studentorgs.kentlaw.iit.edu/cklawreview/symposium/the-supreme-court-and-the-american-public/

Symposium

Symposium	The Supreme Court and the American Public
Country/Territory	United States
City	Chicago
Period	11/15/12 → 11/16/12
Other	Despite the central role that the Supreme Court regularly plays in significant matters of public concern, our understanding of the relationship between the Court and the American public remains strikingly underdeveloped. We have voluminous scholarship on the Court itself—on the development of the institution, on the people who have sat on the bench, and on their written opinions. And we have some understanding, largely through opinion poll data, of attitudes of the American people toward their highest court and the decisions it issues. But when it comes to the connection between the two—on the pathways of communication that link the public and their Supreme Court—there is still much work to be done. This issue of the Cʜɪᴄᴀɢᴏ-Kᴇɴᴛ Lᴀᴡ Rᴇᴠɪᴇᴡ marks an important step toward a better understanding of the nature and evolution of the relationship between the Court and the public.
Internet address	https://studentorgs.kentlaw.iit.edu/cklawreview/symposium/the-supreme-court-and-the-american-public/

Disciplines

Law

Access to Document

What the Court Says What the Public HearsFinal published version, 234 MBLicense: CC BY

Cite this

@conference{88efc3983c924530a41f7d8670413018,

title = "Ideology, Neutrality, and Self-Deception: What the Supreme Court Says and What the Public Hears",

abstract = " Presentations on Ideology, Neutrality, and Self-Deception in public cultural cognition in relation to the Supreme Court. Dan Kahan (Elizabeth K. Dollard Professor of Law and Professor of Psychology, Yale Law School) discusses the parallels between presenting valid science and neutral judicial decision-making to the public and the public's conflicts between expert knowledge and their own pattern recognition. Dan Simon (Richard L. and Maria B. Crutcher Professor of Law and Psychology, USC Gould School of Law) and Nicholas Scurich (Assistant Professor of Psychology \& Social Behavior, and Criminology, Law \& Society, School of Social Ecology, UC-Irvine) present on judicial reasoning, aporia, and the coherence effect. Tom Tyler (Macklin Fleming Professor of Law and Professor of Psychology, Yale Law School) presents on the deference effect. Carolyn Shapiro (Associate Professor of Law and Director of ISCOTUS, IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law) discusses the impression of neutrality and its shifts in the public eye. This is the third of five sessions from the Symposium on the Supreme Court and the American Public, hosted by IIT Chicago-Kent's Institute on the Supreme Court of the United States.",

author = "Dan Kahan and Dan Simon and Nicholas Scurich and Tom Tyler and Carolyn Shapiro",

year = "2012",

month = nov,

day = "16",

language = "American English",

note = "The Supreme Court and the American Public : 2012 Chicago-Kent Law Review Symposium ; Conference date: 15-11-2012 Through 16-11-2012",

url = "https://studentorgs.kentlaw.iit.edu/cklawreview/symposium/the-supreme-court-and-the-american-public/",

}

TY - CONF

T1 - Ideology, Neutrality, and Self-Deception

T2 - The Supreme Court and the American Public

AU - Kahan, Dan

AU - Simon, Dan

AU - Scurich, Nicholas

AU - Tyler, Tom

AU - Shapiro, Carolyn

PY - 2012/11/16

Y1 - 2012/11/16

N2 - Presentations on Ideology, Neutrality, and Self-Deception in public cultural cognition in relation to the Supreme Court. Dan Kahan (Elizabeth K. Dollard Professor of Law and Professor of Psychology, Yale Law School) discusses the parallels between presenting valid science and neutral judicial decision-making to the public and the public's conflicts between expert knowledge and their own pattern recognition. Dan Simon (Richard L. and Maria B. Crutcher Professor of Law and Psychology, USC Gould School of Law) and Nicholas Scurich (Assistant Professor of Psychology & Social Behavior, and Criminology, Law & Society, School of Social Ecology, UC-Irvine) present on judicial reasoning, aporia, and the coherence effect. Tom Tyler (Macklin Fleming Professor of Law and Professor of Psychology, Yale Law School) presents on the deference effect. Carolyn Shapiro (Associate Professor of Law and Director of ISCOTUS, IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law) discusses the impression of neutrality and its shifts in the public eye. This is the third of five sessions from the Symposium on the Supreme Court and the American Public, hosted by IIT Chicago-Kent's Institute on the Supreme Court of the United States.

AB - Presentations on Ideology, Neutrality, and Self-Deception in public cultural cognition in relation to the Supreme Court. Dan Kahan (Elizabeth K. Dollard Professor of Law and Professor of Psychology, Yale Law School) discusses the parallels between presenting valid science and neutral judicial decision-making to the public and the public's conflicts between expert knowledge and their own pattern recognition. Dan Simon (Richard L. and Maria B. Crutcher Professor of Law and Psychology, USC Gould School of Law) and Nicholas Scurich (Assistant Professor of Psychology & Social Behavior, and Criminology, Law & Society, School of Social Ecology, UC-Irvine) present on judicial reasoning, aporia, and the coherence effect. Tom Tyler (Macklin Fleming Professor of Law and Professor of Psychology, Yale Law School) presents on the deference effect. Carolyn Shapiro (Associate Professor of Law and Director of ISCOTUS, IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law) discusses the impression of neutrality and its shifts in the public eye. This is the third of five sessions from the Symposium on the Supreme Court and the American Public, hosted by IIT Chicago-Kent's Institute on the Supreme Court of the United States.

UR - https://scholarship.kentlaw.iit.edu/sscap/Presentations/Friday/2

UR - https://youtu.be/hflx-KaMwEo?si=P6nDPL0S7brDDUJ1

M3 - Presentation

Y2 - 15 November 2012 through 16 November 2012

ER -

Ideology, Neutrality, and Self-Deception: What the Supreme Court Says and What the Public Hears

Abstract

Symposium

Disciplines

Access to Document

Other files and links

Cite this