Using Nominal Group Technique to Guide Research and Control Bias in Socio-Legal History Projects

Patrick Keyzer  
Professor of Law and Public Policy and Dean of the Thomas More Law School, Australian Catholic University
Matthew Richardson
History editor and publisher, Halstead Press
Share:

Abstract

Bias can result in partiality in historical accounts and confirmation bias results in statements and characterisations being accepted as factual without reliance on critical tests. This paper provides an example of how a qualitative research technique called ‘nominal group technique’ (NGT) was used in a legal history project to control bias. The observations and conclusions may have a bearing on the part that NGT could play in other areas of legal research and historical research.

References

1. Archibald, M., R Ambagtsheer, M. Casey and M. Lawless 2019. ‘Using Zoom Videoconferencing for Qualitative Data Collection: Perceptions and Experiences of Researchers and Participants.’ International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 18: 1-8.
2. Biernacki, P. and D. Waldorf, 1981. ‘Snowball sampling: Problems and techniques of chain referral sampling’. Sociological Methods and Research, 10 (2): 141–163.
3. Bonnell, A. and M. Crotty, 2008. ‘Australia’s History Under Howard, 1996-2007.’ Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 617 (1): 149-165.
4. Butler, S. 2009. The Macquarie Dictionary 5th edn., Sydney, Australia: Macquarie Dictionary Publishers.
5. De las Casas, B. 1527-61. History of the Indies.
6. Charlton, J. 1998. Nothing about us without us, Berkeley: University of California Press.
7. Charmna, S., M. Kavetski and D. H. Mueller 2017. ‘Cognitive Bias in the Legal System: Police Officers Evaluate Ambiguous Evidence in a Belief-Consistent Manner.’ Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 6 (2): 193-202.
8. Dacher, K. and R. J. Robinson 1997. ‘Defending the Status Quo: Power and Bias in Social Conflict.’ Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23 (10): 1066-1077.
9. Delbecq, A., A. Van de Ven and D. Gustafson 1975. Group techniques for program planning: a guide to nominal group and delphi processes, Glenview Illinois, Scott Foresman and Co.
10. Delbecq, A. and A. Van de Ven, 1971. ‘A group process model for problem identification and program planning.’ Journal of Applied Behavioral Science , 7: 466–91.
11. Ditto, P. H., B. S. Liu, Clark, C. J., and Zinger, J. F. 2019. ‘At Least Bias is Bipartisan: A Meta-Analytical Comparison of Partisan Bias in Liberals and Conservatives.’ Perspectives on Psychological Science, 14 (2): 273-291.
12. Donaldson, A., Callaghan, A., Bizzini, M., Jowett, A., Keyzer, P. and Nicholson, M. 2018. ‘A concept mapping approach to identifying the barriers to implementing an evidence-based sports injury prevention programme.’ Injury Prevention, 25 (4): 244-251.
13. Dunnette, M., J. Campbell and K. Jaastad 1963. ‘The effect of group participation on brainstorming effectiveness for two industrial samples.’ Journal of Applied Psychology, 47: 30–37.
14. Gelber, K. 2009. ‘Academic freedom and the ‘intellectual diversity’ movement in Australia.’ Australian Journal of Human Rights, 14 (2): 95-114.
15. Griffiths, T. 2007. Slicing the Silence: Voyaging to Antarctica, Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press,
16. Gross N, and S. Simmons, 2006. Americans’ Views of Political Bias in the Academy and Academic Freedom, Working Paper, Mat 22, 2006
17. Gustafson, D, R Shukla, A Delbecq and G Walster 1973. ‘A comparative study of differences in subjective likelihood estimates made by individuals, interacting groups, delphi groups, and nominal groups.’ Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 9 (2): 280–91.
18. Hughes, R. 1987. The Fatal Shore, London: Collins Harville.
19. Jennings, C. 2003. Triple Disadvantage: Out of Sight, Out of Mind, Department of Human Services, Victorian Government, Australia
20. Jerit, J and J Barabas, 2012. ‘Partisan Perceptual Bias and the Information Environment.’Journal of Politics, 74 (3): 672–73.
21. Kelly-Woessner , A. and M. C. Woessner, 2006. ‘My Professor is a Partisan Hack.’ Political Science and Politics, 39 (3): 445.
22. Kennedy, P. 2018. Long Bay, Sydney: Halstead Press.
23. Keyzer,P., J. Johnston, M. Pearson, S. Rodrick and A. Wallace 2013. ‘The courts and social media: what do judges and court workers think?.’ Judicial Officers Bulletin, 25 (6): 47-51.
24. Linder, D. O. and N. Levit 2014. The Good Lawyer: Seeking Quality in the Practice of Law, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
25. Lustick, I. 1996. ‘History, Historiography, and Political Science: Multiple Historical Records and the Problem of Selection Bias.’ American Political Science Review, 90 (3): 605-618.
26. Macintyre, S. and A Clarke 2003. The History Wars. Melbourne: Melbourne University Press.
27. McCullagh, C. B. 2000. ‘Bias in Historical Description, Interpretation and Exploration.’ History and Theory, 39:66.
28. Mental Health Coordinating Council NSW 2013. 30 Years Working for Mental Health.
29. Musgrave, P. and M. Rom, 2015. ‘Fair and Balanced? Experimental Evidence on Partisan Bias in Grading.’ American Politics Research, 43 (3): 536.
30. Nickerson, R. S. 1998. ‘Confirmation Bias: A Ubiquitous Phenomenon in Many Guises.’ Review of General Psychology, 175 (2): 175.
31. Payne B. K., H. A. Vuletich and J. L. Brown-Jannuzzi 2019. ‘Historical Roots of Implicit Bias in Slavery,’ Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 116 (24): 11693-11698.
32. Richardson, M. 2018. ‘Writing History that will be Published and Read.’ History, 128: 13.
33. Robert, H. 2016. Paved with Good Intentions.Canberra: Halstead.
34. Robinson, J. L. 1992. ‘Anti-Hispanic Bias in British Historiography.’ Hispania Sacra, 44: 21.
35. Rummel E. 2002. ‘Cultural Bias and Historiography’ in E. Rummel The Case Against Johann Reuchlin, Toronto: University of Toronto Press, xi.
36. Shirodkar, S. 2019. ‘Bias against Indigenous Australians: Implicit Association Test Results for Australia.’ Journal of Australian Indigenous Issues, 22: 3–34
37. Ssu Ma Chien 1988. Historical Records (c 90BCE) ed. Zhong Hua Shu Ju, Hong Kong.
38. Thompson, L. and D. Wadley, 2017. ‘Ideology, Truth and Spin.’’ Australian Universities Review, 59 (1): 76.
39. Thucydides c.400BCE., The Peloponnesian War, Book IV, [tr. R Crawley].
40. K Vella, C Goldfrad, K Rowan, J Bion and N Black 2000. ‘Use of consensus development to establish national research priorities in critical care’, British Medical Journal, 320 (7240): 976-80
41. Wang, G 1973. ‘Some Comments on the Later Standard Histories.’ In D. Leslie, C. Mackerras and G. Wang (eds.), Essays on the Sources of Chinese History, ANU Press: Canberra, 53.
42. Weeks, B. 2015. ‘Emotions, Partisanship and Misperceptions: How Anger and Anxiety Moderate the Effect of Partisan Bias on Susceptibility to Political Misinformation.’ Journal of Communication, 65 (4): 699-719.
43. Lien-Sheng, Y. 1961. ‘The Organisation of Chinese Official Historiography’, In W. G. Beasley and E. G. Pulleyblank (eds.), Historians of China and Japan, Oxford London: University Press, 44.
How to Cite
1.
Keyzer P, Richardson M. Using Nominal Group Technique to Guide Research and Control Bias in Socio-Legal History Projects. LiC [Internet]. 2022Apr.27 [cited 2022May24];37(3). Available from: https://journals.latrobe.edu.au/index.php/law-in-context/article/view/178

Send mail to Author


Send Cancel