A Network Analysis of Judicial Cross-Citations in Europe

Recent years have seen a growing literature on citations between courts from different countries. What explains why such cross-citations occur between some courts but not others? This article addresses this question with original data on 2,967 citations between the private law supreme courts of the...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Law & social inquiry 2023-08, Vol.48 (3), p.881-905
Main Author: Siems, Mathias
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Case law
Citations
Civil law
Courts
Culture
Decision making
Dependency
Judges & magistrates
Language proficiency
Native language
Network analysis
Regression analysis
Supreme courts
Variables
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c298t-acacfaa6d9b37399fda7ecd109d469ef6596588fa13ba08a16f497d4beba1dc3
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c298t-acacfaa6d9b37399fda7ecd109d469ef6596588fa13ba08a16f497d4beba1dc3
container_end_page 905
container_issue 3
container_start_page 881
container_title Law & social inquiry
container_volume 48
creator Siems, Mathias
description Recent years have seen a growing literature on citations between courts from different countries. What explains why such cross-citations occur between some courts but not others? This article addresses this question with original data on 2,967 citations between the private law supreme courts of the twenty-eight member states of the European Union. These cross-citations form a valued network of twenty-eight nodes, which can be analyzed with tools of network analysis. The article uses the method of a multiple regression quadratic assignment procedure in order to address the dependency of observations in a network. The explanatory variables distinguish between variables that proxy for legal similarities between countries and other factors, and, thus, this article contributes to the wider debate about the predominance of either legal or nonlegal factors in judicial decision-making. The main finding is that nonlegal factors play a decisive role, notably a common native language and overlapping language skills, while legal families are not found to be a significant determinant.
doi_str_mv 10.1017/lsi.2022.22
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2841274618</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2841274618</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c298t-acacfaa6d9b37399fda7ecd109d469ef6596588fa13ba08a16f497d4beba1dc3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNotkMtKAzEYRoMoWKsrXyDgUmZMMplclmWoN4puug__5AKpY1OTGaRv75S6-jaHj8NB6J6SmhIqn4YSa0YYqxm7QAsquaw4F_oSLYjSshItF9foppQdITMl2gVSK_zhx9-Uv_BqD8OxxIJTwO-TizbCgLucSqm6OMIY077guMfrKaeDv0VXAYbi7_53ibbP6233Wm0-X9661aayTKuxAgs2AAin-0Y2WgcH0ltHiXazmA-i1aJVKgBteiAKqAhcS8d73wN1tlmih_PtIaefyZfR7NKUZ9NimOKUSS6omqnHM2VPutkHc8jxG_LRUGJOZcxcxpzKGMaaP7DzVnw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2841274618</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A Network Analysis of Judicial Cross-Citations in Europe</title><source>Criminology Collection</source><source>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</source><source>Nexis UK</source><source>Social Science Premium Collection</source><source>Politics Collection</source><source>Sociology Collection</source><source>PAIS Index</source><source>Cambridge University Press</source><source>Sociological Abstracts</source><creator>Siems, Mathias</creator><creatorcontrib>Siems, Mathias</creatorcontrib><description>Recent years have seen a growing literature on citations between courts from different countries. What explains why such cross-citations occur between some courts but not others? This article addresses this question with original data on 2,967 citations between the private law supreme courts of the twenty-eight member states of the European Union. These cross-citations form a valued network of twenty-eight nodes, which can be analyzed with tools of network analysis. The article uses the method of a multiple regression quadratic assignment procedure in order to address the dependency of observations in a network. The explanatory variables distinguish between variables that proxy for legal similarities between countries and other factors, and, thus, this article contributes to the wider debate about the predominance of either legal or nonlegal factors in judicial decision-making. The main finding is that nonlegal factors play a decisive role, notably a common native language and overlapping language skills, while legal families are not found to be a significant determinant.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0897-6546</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1747-4469</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1545-696X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1017/lsi.2022.22</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cambridge: Cambridge University Press</publisher><subject>Case law ; Citations ; Civil law ; Courts ; Culture ; Decision making ; Dependency ; Judges &amp; magistrates ; Language proficiency ; Native language ; Network analysis ; Regression analysis ; Supreme courts ; Variables</subject><ispartof>Law &amp; social inquiry, 2023-08, Vol.48 (3), p.881-905</ispartof><rights>The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the American Bar Foundation. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution License This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c298t-acacfaa6d9b37399fda7ecd109d469ef6596588fa13ba08a16f497d4beba1dc3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c298t-acacfaa6d9b37399fda7ecd109d469ef6596588fa13ba08a16f497d4beba1dc3</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-5872-945X</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2841274618/fulltextPDF?pq-origsite=primo$$EPDF$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2841274618?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,12827,21356,21367,21374,21375,27323,27845,27903,27904,33202,33590,33748,33753,33964,34509,43712,43793,43927,44094,73967,74056,74214,74385</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Siems, Mathias</creatorcontrib><title>A Network Analysis of Judicial Cross-Citations in Europe</title><title>Law &amp; social inquiry</title><description>Recent years have seen a growing literature on citations between courts from different countries. What explains why such cross-citations occur between some courts but not others? This article addresses this question with original data on 2,967 citations between the private law supreme courts of the twenty-eight member states of the European Union. These cross-citations form a valued network of twenty-eight nodes, which can be analyzed with tools of network analysis. The article uses the method of a multiple regression quadratic assignment procedure in order to address the dependency of observations in a network. The explanatory variables distinguish between variables that proxy for legal similarities between countries and other factors, and, thus, this article contributes to the wider debate about the predominance of either legal or nonlegal factors in judicial decision-making. The main finding is that nonlegal factors play a decisive role, notably a common native language and overlapping language skills, while legal families are not found to be a significant determinant.</description><subject>Case law</subject><subject>Citations</subject><subject>Civil law</subject><subject>Courts</subject><subject>Culture</subject><subject>Decision making</subject><subject>Dependency</subject><subject>Judges &amp; magistrates</subject><subject>Language proficiency</subject><subject>Native language</subject><subject>Network analysis</subject><subject>Regression analysis</subject><subject>Supreme courts</subject><subject>Variables</subject><issn>0897-6546</issn><issn>1747-4469</issn><issn>1545-696X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7TQ</sourceid><sourceid>8BJ</sourceid><sourceid>ALSLI</sourceid><sourceid>BGRYB</sourceid><sourceid>BHHNA</sourceid><sourceid>DPSOV</sourceid><sourceid>HEHIP</sourceid><sourceid>M0O</sourceid><sourceid>M2L</sourceid><sourceid>M2R</sourceid><sourceid>M2S</sourceid><recordid>eNotkMtKAzEYRoMoWKsrXyDgUmZMMplclmWoN4puug__5AKpY1OTGaRv75S6-jaHj8NB6J6SmhIqn4YSa0YYqxm7QAsquaw4F_oSLYjSshItF9foppQdITMl2gVSK_zhx9-Uv_BqD8OxxIJTwO-TizbCgLucSqm6OMIY077guMfrKaeDv0VXAYbi7_53ibbP6233Wm0-X9661aayTKuxAgs2AAin-0Y2WgcH0ltHiXazmA-i1aJVKgBteiAKqAhcS8d73wN1tlmih_PtIaefyZfR7NKUZ9NimOKUSS6omqnHM2VPutkHc8jxG_LRUGJOZcxcxpzKGMaaP7DzVnw</recordid><startdate>20230801</startdate><enddate>20230801</enddate><creator>Siems, Mathias</creator><general>Cambridge University Press</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7TQ</scope><scope>7U4</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88C</scope><scope>88J</scope><scope>8AM</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGRYB</scope><scope>BHHNA</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DHY</scope><scope>DON</scope><scope>DPSOV</scope><scope>DWI</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HEHIP</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>K7.</scope><scope>KC-</scope><scope>M0O</scope><scope>M0T</scope><scope>M2L</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2R</scope><scope>M2S</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>WZK</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5872-945X</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20230801</creationdate><title>A Network Analysis of Judicial Cross-Citations in Europe</title><author>Siems, Mathias</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c298t-acacfaa6d9b37399fda7ecd109d469ef6596588fa13ba08a16f497d4beba1dc3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Case law</topic><topic>Citations</topic><topic>Civil law</topic><topic>Courts</topic><topic>Culture</topic><topic>Decision making</topic><topic>Dependency</topic><topic>Judges &amp; magistrates</topic><topic>Language proficiency</topic><topic>Native language</topic><topic>Network analysis</topic><topic>Regression analysis</topic><topic>Supreme courts</topic><topic>Variables</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Siems, Mathias</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>PAIS Index</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (pre-2017)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Healthcare Administration Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Social Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Criminal Justice Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Criminology Collection</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>PAIS International</collection><collection>PAIS International (Ovid)</collection><collection>Politics Collection</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>Sociology Collection</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest Criminal Justice (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Politics Collection</collection><collection>Criminal Justice Database</collection><collection>Healthcare Administration Database</collection><collection>Political Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Social Science Database</collection><collection>Sociology Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (Ovid)</collection><jtitle>Law &amp; social inquiry</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Siems, Mathias</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A Network Analysis of Judicial Cross-Citations in Europe</atitle><jtitle>Law &amp; social inquiry</jtitle><date>2023-08-01</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>48</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>881</spage><epage>905</epage><pages>881-905</pages><issn>0897-6546</issn><eissn>1747-4469</eissn><eissn>1545-696X</eissn><abstract>Recent years have seen a growing literature on citations between courts from different countries. What explains why such cross-citations occur between some courts but not others? This article addresses this question with original data on 2,967 citations between the private law supreme courts of the twenty-eight member states of the European Union. These cross-citations form a valued network of twenty-eight nodes, which can be analyzed with tools of network analysis. The article uses the method of a multiple regression quadratic assignment procedure in order to address the dependency of observations in a network. The explanatory variables distinguish between variables that proxy for legal similarities between countries and other factors, and, thus, this article contributes to the wider debate about the predominance of either legal or nonlegal factors in judicial decision-making. The main finding is that nonlegal factors play a decisive role, notably a common native language and overlapping language skills, while legal families are not found to be a significant determinant.</abstract><cop>Cambridge</cop><pub>Cambridge University Press</pub><doi>10.1017/lsi.2022.22</doi><tpages>25</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5872-945X</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0897-6546
ispartof Law & social inquiry, 2023-08, Vol.48 (3), p.881-905
issn 0897-6546
1747-4469
1545-696X
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2841274618
source Criminology Collection; International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS); Nexis UK; Social Science Premium Collection; Politics Collection; Sociology Collection; PAIS Index; Cambridge University Press; Sociological Abstracts
subjects Case law
Citations
Civil law
Courts
Culture
Decision making
Dependency
Judges & magistrates
Language proficiency
Native language
Network analysis
Regression analysis
Supreme courts
Variables
title A Network Analysis of Judicial Cross-Citations in Europe
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-23T21%3A56%3A37IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20Network%20Analysis%20of%20Judicial%20Cross-Citations%20in%20Europe&rft.jtitle=Law%20&%20social%20inquiry&rft.au=Siems,%20Mathias&rft.date=2023-08-01&rft.volume=48&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=881&rft.epage=905&rft.pages=881-905&rft.issn=0897-6546&rft.eissn=1747-4469&rft_id=info:doi/10.1017/lsi.2022.22&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2841274618%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c298t-acacfaa6d9b37399fda7ecd109d469ef6596588fa13ba08a16f497d4beba1dc3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2841274618&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true