An exploration of the antecedents and consequences of judges’ time poverty at work: A qualitative study

In an era of “litigation explosion”, Chinese judges are faced with the challenge of effectively handling the overwhelming and increasing volume of court cases. To address the dilemma of “too many cases but too few judges”, previous research on judicial practice has mainly focused on improving the efficiency of litigation procedure. However, one critical aspect that has been largely neglected is the underlying psychological response of judges to this challenge, which may play a pivotal role in the effectiveness and quality of judicial decision making. To address this gap, the current research adopted a person-centered perspective, aiming to uncover the role played by the prevalent feeling of time poverty, the feeling of not having enough time to accomplish all work-related tasks, among judges. We delved into the antecedents that triggered judges’ perception of time poverty, explored the consequences it had on judicial work, and unraveled the mechanisms through which time poverty influences the quality and efficiency of judicial decisions. Based on the grounded theory method, we conducted in-depth interviews with judges recruited through a purposeful sampling method. Specifically, participants consisted of judges (N = 51) who came from various regions across North China, Central China, and Southeast China, and who worked for local People's Courts at various levels (i.e., the primary, intermediate, and high People's Court) with tenures ranging from one to thirty-six years, ensuring a diverse representation of perspectives and experiences. The current study constructed an integrated model that elucidated the antecedents and consequences of the perception of time poverty within the realm of the judiciary. Findings revealed that (1) a mismatch between job demands, which were increased due to the numerous and detailed workloads and the burden of assessment requirements, and resources, which were decreased due to insufficient staffing, contributed to judges’ time poverty at work, and (2) time poverty urged the judges to speed up judicial decisions as well as to prolong their working hours, which in turn damaged the quality and effectiveness of judicial decisions. By examining judges’ feelings of time poverty at work, the current study employed a person-centered perspective that complements the normative approach of extant legal science research and elucidated the mechanism that underlies the formation of judges’ time poverty and its judicial consequences. Findings of the current study provide theoretical insight into the challenge of case overload in China through a psychological perspective and offer practical implications for policymakers to overcome the challenge by prioritizing the feelings and needs of judges.