Using diaries to promote procedural justice in performance appraisals

One-hundred-seventeen college students performed a task on which they received a negative, neutral, or positive performance evaluation. The evaluations were made by the experimenter who (i) kept a diary documenting subjects' performance, (ii) observed their performance but did not keep a diary, or (iii) made the evaluation on no apparent basis (control). It was found that both the evaluation procedure and the evaluation outcome itself were perceived as being fairer when diaries were used as the basis for making evaluations relative to either subjects in the observation procedure group or the control group. The practical implications of these findings for performance appraisals are considered along with the implications for conceptual work on procedural justice.     

Why professionals fail to catch liars and how they can improve

In the first part of this article, I briefly review research findings that show that professional lie catchers, such as police officers, are generally rather poor at distinguishing between truths and lies. I believe that there are many reasons contributing towards this poor ability, and give an overview of these reasons in the second part of this article. I also believe that professionals could become better lie detectors and explain how in the final part of this article.     

Medicolegal appraisals of 22 cases of ocular penetration

22 cases of ocular penetration injury were analyzed and a clinical criteria of the injury's degree was proposed. The reasons causing ocular penetration and the characteristics of injuries were discussed.     

论司法鉴定社会化的规范--从自行委托鉴定现状角度

随着2005年2月28日第十届全国人民代表大会常务委员会第十四次会议通过的《关于司法鉴定管理问题的决定》的颁布和实施,司法鉴定将朝着社会化的方向进行改革。司法鉴定的社会化必将加剧鉴定机构经济利益和社会公信力之间的冲突。自行委托鉴定作为司法鉴定社会化的重要组成部分,必将大幅度上升。如何保证鉴定质量,法官如何审查鉴定结论,值得关注。通过调查发现,当前自行委托鉴定存在的问题不容乐观,主要有鉴定程序不规范,鉴定随意性大,鉴定结论采信的少,重新鉴定的多,有违设置自行委托鉴定、司法鉴定社会化制度的初衷。笔者试想通过分析自行…     

论司法鉴定社会化的规范--从自行委托鉴定现状角度

随着2005年2月28日第十届全国人民代表大会常务委员会第十四次会议通过的《关于司法鉴定管理问题的决定》的颁布和实施，司法鉴定将朝着社会化的方向进行改革。司法鉴定的社会化必将加剧鉴定机构经济利益和社会公信力之间的冲突。自行委托鉴定作为司法鉴定社会化的重要组成部分，必将大幅度上升。如何保证鉴定质量，法官如何审查鉴定结论，值得关注。通过调查发现．当前自行委托鉴定存在的问题不容乐观。主要有鉴定程序不规范，鉴定随意性大，鉴定结论采信的少，重新鉴定的多，     

Predictors of preschoolers' appraisals of conflict in families experiencing intimate partner violence

Factors that may contribute to preschool-aged children's appraisals of their parent's violent conflicts in families experiencing recent intimate partner violence (IPV) were evaluated for 116 mother-child dyads. Mothers and children were interviewed using empirically-validated measures to assess level of violence, maternal and child mental health, and children's appraisals of conflict. Results suggest that preschool-aged children are able to meaningfully respond to statements about their parents' conflicts. Both mothers' and children's reports of violence were significantly associated with children's appraisals of Threat, but not with appraisals of Self-blame. Girls reported significantly higher levels of Self-blame than did boys. Children's cognitive appraisals of Threat and Self-blame did not vary by age or ethnicity. These findings suggest that interventions designed for young children might specifically target their cognitive appraisals to help them regulate their feelings of being threatened and to provide for their safety.     

精神病人合同能力鉴定的相关问题

为了探讨精神病人合同能力鉴定的相关理论,解决合同能力鉴定中鉴定标准混乱的问题,对合同能力鉴定的法律基础、标准、民事行为能力与民事权利能力的区别, 民事行为能力的广义、狭义区分进行了论述.提出合同能力鉴定的核心问题是意思表示的真实性,主张将合同能力分为有、无两级,强调合同能力的分级与民事行为能力的等级存在区别.并提出合同能力鉴定的程式为:首先判定其行为能力,有行为能力相应具有合同能力, 无行为能力即无合同能力,限制民事行为者,应根据年龄、智力、精神健康状况、生活关联度,再分为有合同能力、无合同能力.     

Why justice matters

The starting point of ‘Justice Matters’ is simple: the criminal justice system is far too big; far too costly; far too intrusive. Far from being a means of delivering social justice, it is the cause of much social injustice. The large footprint in society occupied by the combined criminal justice institutions is profoundly socially harmful.     

Why Interpret?

Abstract. My article is about legal interpretation, but not about the question: how to interpret the law. Rather its aim is to make us consider seriously the question: Why is interpretation central to legal practices? After all not all normative practices assign interpretation such a central role. In this regard the law contrasts with morality. The reason for the contrast has to do with the status of sources in the law. There are no “moral sources” while legal sources are central to the law. Legal interpretation is primarily—I will suggest—the interpretation not of the law, but of its sources. To understand why interpretation is central to legal practices requires understanding the role of sources in the law: the reasons for having them, and hence also the ways in which they should be treated. I will show how reflections about these topics connect with some traditional jurisprudential puzzles, such as the relations between law and morality. Are there gaps in the law? Is the law or its interpretation objective or subjective?     

家庭暴力受虐妇女法医学鉴定69例分析

家庭暴力虐待妇女的法医学鉴定近年来在临床检案中较常见，但国内法医文献报道甚少。家庭暴力不仅严重损害了妇女的身体，而且给其心理、精神上造成创伤，这已引起社会的普遍关注。从法医学角度看，加强对受虐妇女的检验、调查、取证工作与研究具有重大意义。本文收集１９９３年１月至１９９５年１２月的６９件案例进行分析，并对有关问题进行初步探讨。