Trust & Confidence Archives - Page 4 of 5 - University of Nebraska Public Policy Center
Rosenbaum, D. I., Hutsell, N., Tomkins, A. J., Bornstein, B. H., Herian, M. N., & Neeley, E. M. (2012). Using court date reminder postcards to reduce courts’ failure to appear rates: A benefit-cost analysis. Judicature, 95, 177-187.
Herian, M. N., Hamm J. A., Tomkins A. J., & Pytlik-Zillig L. M. (2012). Public participation, procedural fairness and evaluations of local governance: The moderating role of uncertainty. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, Online. DOI:10.1093/jopart/mur064
PytlikZillig, L. and Tomkins, A. (2011). Public engagement for informing science and technology policy: What do we know, what do we need to know, and how will we get there? Review of Policy Research, 28(2), 197-217.
PytlikZilllig, L. M., Tomkins, A. J., Herian, M. N., Abdel-Monem, T., & Hamm, J. A. (2011). Exploring Separable Components of Institutional Confidence
Neeley, E. & Tomkins, A.J. Nebraska Minority Justice Committee. Minority Justice Report 2010.
Tomkins, A. J., PytlikZillig, L. M., Herian, M. N., Abdel-Monem, T., & Hamm, J. A. (2010, May 17-20). Public input for municipal policymaking: Engagement methods and their impact on trust and confidence. Paper presented at the 11th Annual Conference on Digital Government Research, Public Administration Online: Challenges and Opportunities, Puebla, Mexico.
Tomkins, A.J. & Applequist, K. (2008).Constructs of justice: Beyond civil litigation. In B.H. Bornstein, R.L. Wiener, R.F. Schopp, & S.L. Willborn (Eds.), Civil Juries and Civil Justice: Psychological and Legal Perspectives (pp. 257-272). New York: Springer.
Racial and Ethnic Bias in the Courts: Perceptions from Public Hearings. Neeley, E. Court Review, 40: 26-32.
Muhlberger, P. (2003d). Political Trust Vs. Generalized Trust in Political Participation. Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Philadelphia, PA.
Champagne, A., Easterling, D., Shuman, D. W., Tomkins, A. J., & Whitaker, E. (2001). Are court-appointed experts the solution to the problems of expert testimony? Judicature, 84(4), 178-183.