Item Type |
Book Section
|
Abstract |
This chapter contributes towards understanding the effect of gender on judging. It examines whether the experiences of women and men judges with their profession support a gender differences or a gender similarities hypothesis. Women and men judges in Switzerland (N = 243) were asked to rank their experiences with professional difficulties, coping strategies, work-life balance, satisfaction and discrimination to determine whether there were differences or similarities due to gender. Significant differences between women and men judges' mean rankings support a gender differences hypothesis, while differences not significant support a gender similarities hypothesis. Findings upheld gender similarities for experiences with professional difficulties, the use of most of the coping strategies, most experiences with work-life balance and satisfaction. Findings upheld gender differences for some coping strategies and experiences of discrimination. Women judges reported using mediation and social support as coping strategies and experienced gender discrimination significantly more than men did. Overall, 27 per cent of findings support a gender differences hypothesis, while 73 per cent support a gender similarities hypothesis. |
Authors |
Ludewig, Revital & Lallave, Juan |
Editors |
Schultz, Ulrike & Shaw, Gisela |
Language |
English |
Keywords |
Gender, Coping, Work-life-balance, Judges, Switzerland, |
Subjects |
law |
HSG Classification |
contribution to scientific community |
Refereed |
No |
Date |
2013 |
Publisher |
Hart Publishing |
Place of Publication |
Oxford |
Series Name |
Oñati International Series in Law and Society |
Page Range |
233-252 |
Number of Pages |
20 |
Title of Book |
Gender and Judging |
ISBN |
978-184113640-0 |
Depositing User |
Arlinda Abduli
|
Date Deposited |
26 Jul 2013 13:38 |
Last Modified |
20 Jul 2022 17:17 |
URI: |
https://www.alexandria.unisg.ch/publications/224652 |