Seeking or controlling the truth? An examination of courtroom questioning practices by Canadian lawyers*

ABSTRACT

The questioning practices of Canadian lawyers were examined. Courtroom examinations (N?=?91) were coded for the type of utterance, the assumed purpose of the utterance, and the length of utterance. Results showed that approximately one-fifth of all utterances were classified as productive for gathering reliable information (i.e. open-ended, probing); less than one percent of all utterances were open-ended. Direct examinations contained more closed yes/no, probing, and open-ended questions. Cross-examinations contained more leading and clarification questions, and opinions. Moreover, cross- (vs. direct) examinations contained more questions with a ‘challenging the witness’ purpose. The longest utterances were opinions, followed by multiple and forced-choice questions. The longest answers were in response to open-ended questions, followed by multiple and probing questions. Implications for the truth-seeking function of the judiciary are discussed.     

Zhengqing Zhang,Intellectual Property Rights in China (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2019) 298 P. $54.58 Hardback

Journal of Chinese Political Science -     

Moderated Commitment: Members’ Decisions Not to Give to Professional Associations

Abstract

Workers pay membership dues to professional associations, which mark their identification with a particular field. Professional associations invite additional voluntary contributions for new or expanded programs, but most members do not make these additional gifts. We advance and test a conceptual model of the forces that might interrupt an otherwise committed or engaged member’s decision to make such a voluntary contribution. We conclude that giving decisions can be displaced by member beliefs that their dues and fees are sufficient or that their disposable income is committed to other obligations. We also conclude that giving decisions intersect with weak association strategy, such as a failure to solicit gifts in ways that are informative or useful to prospective donors.     

A Call for Help?: How Public School Principals’ Subjective Report of Institutional Weakness Relates to Disciplinary Incidents

ABSTRACT

Disciplinary incidents at U.S. public middle- and high-schools are a public policy concern. Although businesses popularly give credence to leaders’ subjective intelligence, principals’ reports of their schools’ strengths and weaknesses are questioned. To determine whether principals’ reports carry legitimacy as indicators of student offenses, the current study utilized a nationally representative survey of principals who reported on their sense of the institution and the number of disciplinary incidents in the past year (N = 1,872; replication cohort, N = 1,833). Findings showed that the more institutional shortcomings a principal endorsed, the higher total number of incidents occurred, even after controlling for institutional strength and several indicators of school crime. These findings have policy and intervention implications for improving student outcomes, and so would be of interest to funding agencies, school administrators, teachers, and parents.     

First Generation in Chilean Higher Education: Tension between Access and Inclusion in a Segmented University System

We analysed the Chilean university student selection processes, comparing ‘First Generation’ and ‘Continuist’ students, using the Chilean Higher Education population databases (2000–2015). Findings confirm that 60 percent of participants in the selection process are First Generation students. The data registers an increasing self-exclusion phenomenon. Of the students who did not take the selection test after enrolling, 80 percent are First Generation and 18 are enrolled in a selective university, compared to 44 in the Continuist conglomerate. These differences may be explained by cultural capital in the Bourdieu sense, in conjunction with a diversified, massified and marketalised higher education system.     

Complex Trauma: Missed and Misdiagnosis in Forensic Evaluations

Psychological Injury and Law - Forensic evaluators frequently utilize diagnoses as a way to document the nature and severity of impairment and/or injury in civil and criminal cases despite...     

Packing Heat in the Classroom: Public Support for “Armed Teacher” Policy

ABSTRACT

Recently, states have enacted teacher-carry laws. While controversial, little scholarship has tapped public attitudes toward such reforms. Because public opinion shapes policy, the public is an important stakeholder in this debate. Thus, we investigated three questions. First, how supportive is the public of arming teachers? Second, what demographic and social divides exist, if any, for reform approval? Finally, do crime-related perceptions, concerning views about public safety, and criminogenic influences shape policy preferences? We test these questions using a 2018 poll of Virginia residents (N = 521). Overall, approval for teacher-carry is split. Crime-related perceptions mediate some of the initial social and demographic divides in opinion but other correlates, such as parental status, remain salient predictors of views. Implications are discussed.     

The Green New Deal Must Preserve the Existing Nuclear Fleet

Abstract

As the largest source of carbon-free energy in the United States, nuclear energy must play a vital role in reducing emissions. This article suggests the Green New Deal, an ambitious federal proposal to address climate change, should aim to preserve the existing nuclear fleet by authorizing states to establish zero emission credit (“ZEC”) programs. The ZEC programs will provide credits, in the form of revenue, for the carbon-free attribute of nuclear energy. This article posits the ZEC programs should be based on a model ZEC program developed by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and explicitly authorized by amendment of the Federal Power Act to avoid issues of preemption.     

Psychological factors influencing religious congregation members’ reporting of alleged sexual abuse

ABSTRACT

The sexual abuse of children within religious institutions has become a topic of increasing public concern in recent decades. However, to date there has been little in the way of psychological analyses of the processes by which congregation members judge the credibility of alleged abuses, or whether they would intend to report such allegations to the police. In this study, we examined the roles of ingroup identity, moral foundations, and social dominance orientation on reporting intentions and allegation credibility assessments among Church of England congregation members (n?=?454) and non-religious controls (n?=?457). While there were few predictors of reporting intentions, we found that churchgoers were consistently more sceptical of allegations of abuse, with these trends being differentially moderated by ingroup identification, the endorsement of various moral impulses, and anti-egalitarianism. We discuss our data in light of ongoing attempts to improve reporting procedures within the Church.