The Empirical Status of Social Learning Theory: A Meta‐Analysis

Social learning theory has remained one of the core criminological paradigms over the last four decades. Although a large body of scholarship has emerged testing various propositions specified by the theory, the empirical status of the theory in its entirety is still unknown. Accordingly, in the present study, we subject this body of empirical literature to a meta‐analysis to assess its empirical status. Results reveal considerable variation in the magnitude and stability of effect sizes for variables specified by social learning theory across different methodological specifications. In particular, relationships of crime/deviance to measures of differential association and definitions (or antisocial attitudes) are quite strong, yet those for differential reinforcement and modeling/imitation are modest at best. Furthermore, effect sizes for differential association, definitions, and differential reinforcement all differed significantly according to variations in model specification and research designs across studies. The implications for the continued vitality of social learning in criminology are discussed.     

The Origins of ‘Alien Status’ in the English Common Law

In his 2001 monograph on Aliens in Medieval Law: The Origins of Modern Citizenship, Dr Keechang Kim suggested that there was no evidence before the late fourteenth century that birth beyond the sea made a person an alien. This article discusses a series of cases heard from the mid-thirteenth century onwards in which tenants pleaded the claimant's birth overseas by way of bar to hereditary claims to land and in which it seems to have been treated as a bar in itself, though one to which the king might grant special exemption. This seems to have remained the position until legislation of 1351 (triggered by doubts about the eligibility of two sons of Edward III born overseas to succeed to the throne) which not only confirmed their eligibility but also made the first general extension of the right to inherit to children born overseas to parents in the king's allegiance.     

Veteran Status and Marital Aggression: Does Military Service Make a Difference?

Previous research has demonstrated that rates of domestic violence are higher among couples where at least one person is on active duty. What is unclear is whether or not the propensity to engage in domestic violence remains after an individual has left the military and entered into veteran status. The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate whether or not veteran status will increase an individual’s tendency to engage in acts of domestic violence. Through the use of cultural spillover theory, the argument can be made that the effects of military resocialization will persist even after separation from active duty service, and that veteran status will contribute to domestic violence in a marriage. Analysis of the National Survey of Families and Households Wave I dataset allowed for a comparison of the rates of domestic violence among veterans and non-veterans to see if veterans are more likely to engage in domestic violence, net of combat exposure, relationship stressors and other statistical controls. The data reveal that male veterans are in fact less likely to engage in an episode of domestic violence as compared to civilians with no previous military experience; however, once other factors are accounted for, this relationship becomes nonsignificant.

'Unlawful Enemy Combatant': Status, Theory of Culpability, or Neither?

The Military Commissions Act of 2006 represents the United States’most recent effort to establish a forum to try detainees capturedin its ‘Global War on Terrorism’. This article brieflyexplores the Act's use of the term ‘unlawful enemy combatant’to define both subject matter jurisdiction as well as the potentialsource of criminal liability. The article highlights the term'sabsence from the positive law of war as well as confusion overits legal significance in United States domestic law. Examiningthe relationship between status and protections under the lawof war, the authors conclude the Act's use of the term ‘unlawfulenemy combatant’ reflects legal convenience more thanan objective assessment of the existing laws and customs ofwar.     

What’s the Party Like? The Status of the Political Party in Anti-Defection Jurisdictions

Law and Philosophy - This paper explores how political parties should be regulated in jurisdictions with anti-defection laws, which constitutionalise parties’ control over the legislative...     

Legal Recognition of Plural Unions: Is A Nonmarital Relationship Status the Answer to the Dilemma?

Intimate relationships involving three or more adults are increasingly visible in American society. Multiparty relationships, which are also known as plural unions, mainly take two different forms: systemic polygyny and polyamory. Family law currently denies recognition to all plural unions. Granting legal recognition to multiparty relationships would advance the goal of family pluralism and expand access to valuable legal protections. However, the possibility of granting official recognition to plural unions must be approached with caution, because systemic polygyny poses a serious risk of harm to women and children arising from the imposition of oppressive gender roles. A possible solution to this dilemma lies in offering a formal nonmarital status (such as civil union, domestic partnership, reciprocal beneficiary, or designated beneficiary) to participants in plural unions. As a result of their differing attitudes toward marriage, polyamorists would be likely to embrace a nonmarital relationship status, while participants in systemic polygyny would most likely reject it. Thus, providing a nonmarital status for plural unions could allow polyamorists to obtain the benefits of relationship recognition, without placing the government's seal of approval on the oppressive aspects of systemic polygyny.     

Did Roman Treatment of Freedwomen Influence Rabbinic Halakhah on the Status of Female Converts in Marriage?

Rabbinic legal texts often pair converts with freed slaves. This association has been explained by the notion that, like converts, freed slaves joined Judaism upon manumission; therefore, freed men and women were legally viewed like converts. I suggest an inverse and more complex dynamic, through which Roman laws and concepts regarding freed persons influenced particular elements of rabbinic halakhah concerning converts, especially female converts. Since Roman freedwomen were new citizens with certain marital limitations, which have been attributed to lacking pedigree and an assumed sexual history (during servitude), their legal status offered a useful prism for considering female converts, who also had matrimonial restrictions and were without lineage. Moreover, given that a freedwoman’s prior enslavement had implications for her sexual background, female converts were viewed through that same lens. So, even though female converts may have come from non-Jewish families that considered their daughters’ virginity an important asset, the rabbinic legal linkage of freed slaves and converts affected several halakhot concerning female converts and their status in marriage, irrespective of their actual sexual history. Yet certain non-legal rabbinic teachings distinguish between these two female cohorts, resembling the differentiation between freedwomen and freeborn females that characterized the Roman world.     

Exploring the Taxometric Status of Psychopathy Among Youthful Offenders: Is There a Juvenile Psychopath Taxon?

Several recent studies have examined the taxometric status of psychopathic and antisocial traits in adult samples, almost all of which have supported a dimensional model. The three studies examining whether psychopathic traits among youths are best conceptualized as a discrete latent class (or taxon) or as a dimensional construct, however, have provided conflicting results. In a sample of 723 delinquent youths who completed two self-report measures of psychopathic traits, results across taxometric procedures provided uniform support for a dimensional model. Additionally, analyses comparing putative dichotomous and dimensional classification models in terms of predicting relevant criterion measures (e.g., delinquent behavior, substance abuse, and hostility) indicated superior validity for the dimensional model. Implications for research, policy, and practice are reviewed.     

Does Separation or Divorce Make any Difference? An Interactional Perspective on Intimate Partner Violence with Focus on Marital Status

This article reports a study of the impact of marital status on interactional aspects of intimate partner violence (IPV) among help-seeking women. Are there differences among marital status groups concerning (a) other sociodemographic variables, (b) IPV categories, (c) interactional IPV variables, and (d) perception and interpretation of IPV? A representative sample of 157 women recruited from family counseling, the police, and shelters were interviewed. There was no significant sociodemographic difference among the marital status groups. There were no significant differences pertaining to IPV categories, neither for IPV severity, injury, duration, frequency, mortal danger, and regularity, nor for physical, psychological, or sexual IPV. However, multivariate logistic regression showed that post-separation women were significantly more likely to have (a) had longer duration since the last psychological and sexual IPV episode, (2) reported the physical IPV to be more predictable, and (3) used more active coping strategies against physical IPV. However, our research was not able to determine if perception and interpretation predict actual leaving behavior, or vice versa, or how the victim’s subjective perception and interpretation of the IPV changes over time.     

Will the Truth Come Out? The Effect of Deception,Age, Status,Coaching, and Social Skills on CBCA Scores

The impact of Veracity, Age, Status (witness or suspect), Coaching (informed or uninformed regarding CBCA), and Social Skills (social anxiety, social adroitness, and self-monitoring) on Criteria-Based Content Analysis scores was examined. Participants (aged 5–6, 10–11, 14–15, and undergraduates) participated in a rubbing the blackboard event. In a subsequent interview they told the truth or lied about the event. They were accused of having rubbed the blackboard themselves (suspect condition) or were thought to have witnessed the event (witness condition), and were or were not taught some CBCA criteria prior to the interview. CBCA scores discriminated between liars and truth tellers in children, adults, witnesses, and suspects. However, truth tellers obtained higher CBCA scores than liars only when the liars were uninformed about CBCA. CBCA scores were correlated with social skills. It is argued that these findings should caution those who believe that the validity of CBCA has been conclusively demonstrated.     

Why Not Let Kids Be Kids? An Exploratory Analysis of the Relationship Between Alternative Rationales for Managing Status Offending and Youths’ Self-Concepts

Over the past several decades, the juvenile justice system has struggled with an effective response to status offenders and their unwanted behaviors. Three divergent rationales have emerged for handling these youth: (1) treatment, (2) deterrence, and (3) normalization. Using data from over 300 youth under supervision by agencies in three states, the current study assesses how these differing practices are related to youths’ self-concepts. Results provide support for both deterrence and normalization-based rationales over the historical treatment-based rationale. Viewing status offending as normal adolescent behavior (i.e., normalization) has the most beneficial effect on self-concept. Study limitations and directions for future research are discussed.     

Taking Care of Strasbourg: The Status of the European Convention on Human Rights and the Case-Law of the European Court of Human Rights in Kosovo’s Domestic Legal System

This paper addresses the position of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) case-law in Kosovo’s domestic legal order. To begin with, it reviews the background of the issue of human rights in Kosovo highlighting its distinct position and perspective. This article then analyses the position held by the European Convention on Human Rights and its protocols in Kosovo’s legal order while also addressing the ECHR’s constitutionalization, its direct effect and the constitutional review on basis of it. The paper then examines whether the case-law of the ECtHR is binding in Kosovo, whether it is directly effective, and whether Kosovo’s Constitutional Court can use it as a ground in the conduct of constitutional reviews. This paper argues that the ECHR and the case-law of the ECtHR both hold a privileged status under Kosovo’s constitutional law, despite Kosovo not being a party to the ECHR and, therefore, having no international liability to implement the ECHR. In addition, the paper offers certain arguments regarding the relative positions of the ECHR and the case-law of the ECtHR within the current practice of Kosovo’s judicial system. This paper concludes with the argument that the ECHR and the case-law of the ECtHR hold a privileged status in the context of Kosovo’s domestic legal order—one which could serve as a precedent in respecting human rights and freedoms.