http://www.lifescienceglobal.com/pms/index.php/FIA <p>Frontiers in Law is an international, peer-reviewed, open- access journal that publishes articles on all aspects of legal interest. It aims to provide a multidisciplinary forum for publishing manuscripts by global scholars examining the legal systems, legal practitioners pursuing in any discipline of law; as well as students of legal studies. The journal welcomes traditional legal articles in all disciplines of law with particular emphasis on innovative articles addressing the contemporary developments in this field. We aim to publish research work truly representing the wide range of interests across all legal scholarship globally; and disseminate this knowledge to reader in every corner of the world free of cost through our open access publication policy and indexing in renowned agencies.</p> <p>The journal accepts submission of manuscripts, review articles and case reports relevant to the different subfields of law including comparative, transnational, international, historical, theoretical, economical, social, health, environmental, penal aspects etc as well as other currently arising facets in law and legislation; however, the submissions are considered for publication after rigorous peer review.</p> Lifescience Global en-US Frontiers in Law 2817-2302 http://www.lifescienceglobal.com/pms/index.php/FIA/article/view/10864 <p>Judges’ wellbeing can affect society as a whole. The Model of Judicial Stress (MJS) proposed relationships between multiple personal and social factors, workplace stress, and a variety of negative personal and professional outcomes that can result from high stress. Prior studies have found gender differences in stress among judges, as well as stress buffering effects from personal social support networks. In this study, we examined 76 judges’ self-reported levels of three types of stress and considered the potential benefits of social support from workplace networks – in addition to personal networks – as a separate buffer for stress. In addition, we tested relationships between stress and social identity, and stress and stress-intervention preferences. Consistent with previous research, this study found gender differences for the different stress measures: burnout, secondary traumatic stress, and general stress. Further, workplace social support was negatively related to burnout when controlling for the effects of gender, time on the bench, and nonworkplace social support. Judges who placed higher importance on their “judge” identity reported higher levels of stress when they had lower social support from personal networks. Finally, stress mediated the relationship between social support and job satisfaction. Addressing judicial stress can promote wellness in judges and society in general.</p> Katie M. Snider Paul G. Devereux Monica K. Miller Charles P. Edwards Copyright (c) 2026 2026-02-17 2026-02-17 5 1 15 10.6000/2817-2302.2026.05.01