Parental discord vs family structure: effects of divorce on the self-esteem of daughters

This study investigated the effects of family structure (parents together or not) and parental discord (ratings of the happiness of the marriage of biological parents) on the self-esteem of 199 female undergraduates. Family structure and happiness ratings were substantially related, with those separated rated as less happy. Self-esteem was significantly related to parental happiness, even with family structure controlled, but not to family structure with parental happiness controlled. With the sample divided into three groups (happy-together, unhappy-together, and separated) ANOVA showed a significant effect for group, with the unhappy-together group showing significantly lower self-esteem than the happy-together group, and the separated group intermediate. Parental discord thus appears to lower the selfesteem of daughters, whereas separation of parents does not. These findings support Heatherington's idea that children may be better off in a stable family where parents are divorced than in an intact family with much parental discord.Thanks are expressed to Susan Stevenson Cowles for her contributions to all stages of the study, and to Judith Fidati, Anita Katz, and Susanne Long for their assistance in the scoring and statistical analyses. The author is also grateful to Andrew Cherlin, Edmund Henderson, and Ruth C. Wylie for their helpful suggestions.Barbara H. Long is Professor Emeritus at Goucher College, where she has taught for 20 years. She is a social psychologist, having received her Ph.D. from the University of Delaware and has, at present, research interests in the attitudes of young women towards marriage and career.     

What could be achieved with greater public hospital autonomy? Comparison of public and PNFP hospitals in Uganda

The policy of hospital autonomy has been discussed for some time in Uganda. There is little evidence from Uganda or elsewhere that increased autonomy will improve hospital performance. This article compares the performance of three private not‐for‐profit (PNFP) and public hospital pairs to address this question. PNFP and public hospitals have similar management structures but PNFP hospitals had better trained managers and a church affiliated chair in the hospital management committee. Both types have problems with personnel management but these appear more pronounced in public hospitals. Drug supply management appears better in PNFP hospitals. Overall, workloads are similar, but analysis of patterns of utilisation and prices across services suggest that patient choice of facilities is influenced by relative price levels, and that willingness to pay is higher for PNFP services. PNFP hospitals are more successful at generating revenue. There are no clear differences in efficiency between PNFP and public hospitals but there is some evidence of higher quality levels in PNFP hospitals. PNFP hospitals' performance is plausibly related to three areas of managerial autonomy. First, better management of drug supply is facilitated by their freedom to purchase drugs from the open market. Second, greater success with personnel management is plausibly related to their greater autonomy over staffing. Third, higher levels of cost recovery are enabled by their freedom to set fees. However, differences in accountability and competence of hospital management, and population willingness to pay for services may also help to explain differences. Further, the use of PNFP financing strategy by public hospitals has implications for universal access to hospital services. Although there appear to be potential advantages from greater public hospital autonomy, the Ugandan government should ensure it has developed strategies to enhance public hospital management and to protect access to public hospitals before advancing further with hospital autonomy policy. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Mechanisms for rent transfers: Subcontracting among military aircraft manufacturers

Models of prototyped and non-prototyped competitions for prime contracts from the U.S. defense department suggest that the latter are much more vulnerable to bid-rigging than are the former. Subcontracting data reveal that pairs of firms who have been rivals in major non-prototyped competitions have a larger number of subcontracts with one another than do other pairs of firms. The analysis concludes that subcontracts may serve as vehicles for division of the spoils of collusive bidding on prime contracts.     

Ideology and Political Alienation

A substantial literature over the years has focused on the relationship between political alienation and ideology. Much of this research contends that conservatives are more alienated than liberals because philosophically they believe that the best government is that which governs least. A close reading of the literature, however, reveals little consistency in the empirical findings. Survey data from Norway, Sweden, and the United States are used to provide a more extensive and consistent test of the hypothesis. Ideology is defined as both left/right self-identification and policy preference on economic and "new political" issues. The evidence reveals that in Scandinavia higher levels of alienation are found among conservatives, whereas in the US the left has been consistently more alienated, except on "new politics" issues. The discrepancy between the citizen's preferred ideological orientation and that which the public perceives the government to take, is used to explain the different findings for the three countries and the shifts in the relationship between ideology and alienation across time.