the main purpose of this paper is to explore the relationship between organizational trust and organizational justice components and their role on job involvement. the method of this research is descriptive and co-relational, and the statistical sample contains 350 employees and managers of education in meybod and ardakan (yazd). data collected by moorman's (1999) organizational justice qu...

The main purpose of this paper is to explore the relationship between organizational trust and organizational justice components and their role on job involvement. The method of this research is descriptive and co-relational, and the statistical sample contains 350 employees and managers of education in Meybod and Ardakan (Yazd). Data collected by Moorman's (1999) organizational justice questio...

When did you last hear mention of Dred Scott,1 the case, its many opinions, or the Justices who sat for it, without a near simultaneous use of the words “best” or “worst”? The majority and dissenting opinions of Dred Scott, as well as the Justices who wrote them, appear on a range of best and worst lists. Ranking Supreme Court Justices and Supreme Court opinions is no trivial pursuit, and for l...

Why do policy-motivated justices conform to unfavorable precedents? This article suggests that two theories, social-legal backgrounds and precedential characteristics, help explain why justices support unfavorable precedents. To test the explanatory power of these theories, the article uses data from the 1953-94 terms that ascertains whether justices cast precedential votes. The results, after ...

Supreme Court Justices' uniform professional backgrounds have drawn increasing criticism. Yet it is unclear how diverse professional training would affect the Court's decisions. This Article offers the first empirical analysis of how Justices with diverse professional training vote: It examines a unique period when Justices with formal legal education sat with Justices who entered the professio...

Previous research has identified strategic behavior in the nomination, confirmation, and retirement processes of the Supreme Court, each independently. This paper analyzes the interaction between the justices, the president, and the Senate in these processes. I constructed a game theoretic model to consider the nomination and approval process of Supreme Court justices and the change in dynamics...

To understand policy-motivated behavior of Supreme Court justices it is necessary to measure their policy preferences. To date, most scholars have assumed the policy preferences of Supreme Court justices remain consistent throughout the course of their careers, and most measures of judicial ideology – such as Segal and Cover (1989) scores – are time invariant. This assumption is facially valid;...