Maternal Acceptance as a Moderator of the Relation Between Threat to Self Appraisals and Mental Health Problems in Adolescents from Divorced Families

Appraisals about the implications of stressful events that are evaluated as involving a threat to self (negative self-evaluation, negative evaluation from others, rejection by others) have been shown to place youth at risk for the development of mental health problems. This longitudinal study tested a protective-stabilizing interactive model, in which high maternal acceptance was predicted to mitigate the prospective relation between threat to self appraisals and change in adolescents’ mental health problems six months later. Participants were 89 adolescents from divorced families ages 10–12 and residential mothers. Adolescents reported on threat to self appraisals from the most stressful event experienced in the past month. Mothers and youth reported on maternal acceptance and mental health problems. Multiple regression analyses provided support for the protective effects of maternal acceptance on adolescents’ mental health problems. Intervention implications are discussed. Ana Brown is a pre-doctoral fellow in prevention research (NIMH 2 T32 MH18387–19) and doctoral student in the Department of Psychology at Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ. Research interests include the study of children’s appraisals and responses to stressful events in the prevention of mental health problems. Sharlene Wolchik is a clinical psychologist and professor in the Department of Psychology at Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ. Her research focuses on identifying risk and protective factors for children whose parents have divorced. She also has designed and evaluated the efficacy of preventive interventions for children from divorced families and children who have experienced parental bereavement. Jenn-Yun Tein is a research associate professor and Co-Director of the Research Methodology Core of the Prevention Research Center at Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ. Her research interests include analyses of mediation and moderation of preventive interventions as well as applications of methodology and statistics in prevention research. Irwin Sandler is a Regents’ Professor in the Department of Psychology and Director of the Prevention Research Center at Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ. His research interests focus on understanding resilience for children exposed to stress and on the development, evaluation and dissemination of programs to promote resilience and prevent mental health problems for children in stress.     

Agenda Control, the Median Justice, and the Majority Opinion on the U.S. Supreme Court

Some scholars argue that the author of the majority opinion exercises the most influence over the Court's opinion-writing process and so can determine what becomes Court policy, at least within the limits of what some Court majority finds acceptable. Other students of the Court have suggested that the Court's median justice effectively dictates the content of the majority opinion: whatever policy the median justice most wants, she can get. We test these competing models with data on Supreme Court decision making during the Burger Court (1969–86). While we find substantial evidence for both models, the agenda control model gains greater support. This suggests that opinions on the Court on each case are driven, in general, by the interaction of three key variables: the policy preferences of the majority opinion author, the policy preferences of the median justice, and the location of the legal status quo .     

Friends in high places: The wealth effects of JFK's assassination on the assets of LBJ's supporters

This paper uses anecdotal evidence to identify a group of firms that had significant ties to President Lyndon Johnson and determines the effect of Johnson's unexpected rise to the Presidency on the market value of these firms. The unexpected nature of President Kennedy's death eliminates the confounding event problem typically associated with election results. We are able to identify four separate portfolios of firms that had political ties to Lyndon Johnson. Our research suggests that the market expected significant benefits to accrue to these firms as a result of Johnson's becoming President. When Catholic John Kennedy and Johnson were running together in 1960 a joke hop-scotched around the parties in Texas and Washington that Kennedy had told Johnson, “Lyndon, when we get elected I'm going to dig a tunnel to the Vatican,” and Lyndon had replied, “That's OK with me as long as Brown & Root gets the contract” (Dugger, 1982: 286).     

Canadian Federal-Provincial Overlap and Presumed Government Inefficiency

It is often claimed that overlapping government activity inCanada's federal system causes significant government inefficiency.The three major studies on the subject have demonstrated theexistence of extensive overlap, but they resort to qualitativearguments and anecdotal evidence to conclude either that overlapcauses significant government inefficiency (the traditionalprovincial position) or that overlap is fairly well managed(the traditional federal position). Thus, the debate about overlapremains essentially a debate about federal and provincial power,not about efficiency. This is apparently unavoidable, due tothe difficulty of measuring the effect of overlap on efficiency.     

PARLIAMENTARY COMMITTEES,PUBLIC SERVANTS AND DUE PROCESS

Abstract: The parliamentary system of government in its Australian form has a number of unresolved problems, notwithstanding its many virtues. One such problem is that of the role of public servants when called before parliamentary committees as witnesses. The current guidelines are mainly advice to public servants as to how they should avoid or defer questions which neither the minister nor the departmental secretary has authorised them to answer. Of course, this is useful and proper within its limits. However, it fails to address many of the dilemmas and career-threatening choices which can face public servants who find themselves being questioned in an aggressive, hostile manner by members of a parliamentary committee. Unfair treatment of witnesses is not a trivial matter and there are more than isolated instances. This article deals with an episode involving the Joint Parliamentary Committee of Public Accounts in 1982. The case is now some years in the past, but it is still worth examining for what it teaches about gaps in our constitutional conventions. At the end of the article we suggest action in four areas. Intensive training and retraining is needed, first in the upper ranks of the public service, and secondly for chairpersons and members of parliamentary committees. Thirdly there is a need for MAB-MIAC to revisit yet again their guidelines on accountability and to instigate a review of the government's guidelines for public servants appearing as witnesses. Both sets of guidelines are anachronisms. Finally, we suggest that, in any future review of government policy in this area, consideration be given to the amendment of relevant legislation to bring due process and the protection of witnesses more closely into line with the rights available to persons appearing before a court.     

Estimation of body exposure to explosion

An ordnance-disposal expert was killed while disposing of a cache of explosives. The likely position of the body was reconstructed by modeling the explosion as an omnidirectional emission of particles from a model of the explosion site and noting the distribution of particles on a model of a human. The applications and limitations of this method in reconstructing the events and correlation with the injuries noted at autopsy are discussed.