Reference health
Sacrificing Diversity for 'Quality': How Judicial Performance Evaluations are Failing Women and Minorities
13/13 checkable references clean · checked 2026-10-08
Every reference with a DOI in the deposited reference list resolved to a known work in Crossref or DataCite at the dated check, and none carried a retraction, withdrawal, or removal notice.
25 without a DOI — not checked. A reference deposited without a DOI is never matched by title or guessed at; it stays outside the checked set, and this line discloses that.
The 13 checked references that resolve
resolves10.1162/003465398557825
Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimation with Spatially Dependent Panel Data
resolves10.2307/3481406
The Norm of Prior Judicial Experience and Its Consequences for Career Diversity on the U.S. Supreme Court
resolves10.1046/j.0038-4941.2003.08404009.x
Acclimation Effects and Separate Opinion Writing in the U.S. Courts of Appeals<sup>*</sup>
resolves10.1177/1536867x0700700301
Robust Standard Errors for Panel Regressions with Cross-Sectional Dependence
resolves10.1007/s11199-005-8292-4
Student Evaluations and Gendered Expectations: What We Can't Count Can Hurt Us
The 25 references without a DOI — listed, not checked
no DOI — not checkedref1
no DOI — not checkedJudicial Retention Evaluation Programs
no DOI — not checkedref3
no DOI — not checkedref8
no DOI — not checkedref9
no DOI — not checkedref10
no DOI — not checkedGender and Professional Identity: Unexplored Issues in Judicial Performance Evaluation
no DOI — not checkedJudicial Accountability the Right Way
no DOI — not checkedref15
no DOI — not checkedWhat Difference Does Method of Judicial Selection Make? Selection Procedures in State Courts of Last Resort
no DOI — not checkedLawyers Rate Female Jurists as Less Courteous than Men
no DOI — not checkedThe Promise and the Performance of the Missouri Plan: Judicial Selection in the Fifty States
no DOI — not checkedJudging the Judges
no DOI — not checkedRating the Ratings of the American Bar Association Standing Committee on Federal Judiciary
no DOI — not checkedLoot or Find: Fact or Frame?
no DOI — not checkedJudging the Judges: Nearly 800 Lawyers Turn in Judicial Performance Evaluation Grades
no DOI — not checkedref26
no DOI — not checkedBeyond Quality: First Principles in Judicial Selection and their Application to a Commission-Based Selection System
no DOI — not checkedJudicial Performance Evaluation in the States
no DOI — not checkedJudicial Performance Review in Arizona: Goals, Practical Effects and Concerns
no DOI — not checkedThe ABA Standing Committee on Federal Judiciary: A Contmporary Assessment--Part 1
no DOI — not checkedref34
no DOI — not checkedref35
no DOI — not checkedref36
no DOI — not checkedJudging the Judges: About the Survey
What this badge says. CiteStamped means the CHECKABLE references of this
work were clean at the dated check: each resolved to a known work in a public registry, and none
carried a retraction notice at that time. It says nothing about the quality, findings,
or importance of the work itself, and nothing about references deposited without a DOI.
checked 2026-10-08 — re-checked daily as this page is visited; titles and statuses come from Crossref and DataCite and are not part of the signed record
Embed this badge
Both snippets point at the live badge image and link back to this page. The badge re-renders from the daily check, so an embed never goes stale by more than a day of visits.
<a href="https://citestamp.com/citestamped/10.2139/ssrn.1580545"><img src="https://citestamp.com/citestamped/10.2139/ssrn.1580545/badge.svg" alt="CiteStamped reference-health badge" width="460" height="64"></a>
[](https://citestamp.com/citestamped/10.2139/ssrn.1580545)