Effective Practitioner–Scholar Relationships: Lessons from a Coproduction Partnership

This article presents a continuum of possible coproduction arrangements between scholars and practitioners and suggests that greater engagement is necessary to bridge the commonly cited problems that create the gap between research and practice. Reflections on an Australian case of a major public sector coproduction partnership, the highest degree of interaction on the continuum, are used to argue that successful engagement between practitioners and scholars is possible, while also recognizing the difficulties inherent in this process. The benefits and challenges of this partnership are presented, as well as critical factors that drive effective relationships. Lessons are drawn for the development of future coproduction partnerships, including the importance of recognizing that both scholars and practitioners are, in fact, researchers.     

Whistleblowing and Compliance in the Judicial Hierarchy

One way that principals can overcome the problem of informational asymmetries in hierarchical organizations is to enable whistleblowing. We evaluate how whistleblowing influences compliance in the judicial hierarchy. We present a formal model in which a potential whistleblower may, at some cost, signal noncompliance by a lower court to a higher court. A key insight of the model is that whistleblowing is most informative when it is rare. While the presence of a whistleblower can increase compliance by lower courts, beyond a certain point blowing the whistle is counterproductive and actually reduces compliance. Moreover, a whistleblower who is a “perfect ally” of the higher court (in terms of preferences) blows the whistle too often. Our model shows an important connection between the frequency of whistleblowing and the effectiveness of whistleblowing as a threat to induce compliance in hierarchical organizations.     

Personal and Vicarious Experience with the Criminal Justice System as a Predictor of Punitive Sentencing Attitudes

This study examined the impact of prior personal or vicarious experience with the criminal justice system on sentencing attitudes. Existing research on sentencing attitudes has examined factors such as race, gender, income level, political affiliation, and education level, but few research studies have focused on actual contact with the criminal justice system and its influence on perceptions of sentencing as either too harsh or too lenient. The current study utilized data collected by the Roper Center for Public Opinion Research. Over 1,500 respondents were surveyed nationwide in 2006 regarding sentencing attitudes. Logistic regression analysis was utilized to assess the impact of factors of interest on sentencing attitudes. Results indicated that individuals who had been charged with a crime (personal experience), or who had an immediate relative or close friend who had been charged (vicarious experience), were more likely to perceive the criminal justice system as too harsh, regardless of race/ethnicity.     

The diverse domains of quantified selves: self-tracking modes and dataveillance

The concept of self-tracking has recently begun to emerge in discussions of ways in which people can record specific features of their lives, often using digital technologies, to monitor, evaluate and optimize themselves. There is evidence that the personal data that are generated by the digital surveillance of individuals (dataveillance) are now used by a range of actors and agencies in diverse contexts. This paper examines the ‘function creep’ of self-tracking by outlining five modes that have emerged: private, communal, pushed, imposed and exploited. The analysis draws upon theoretical perspectives on concepts of selfhood, citizenship, dataveillance and the global digital data economy in discussing the wider socio-cultural implications of the emergence and development of these modes of self-tracking.     

Ethnic-Racial Socialization and Adjustment Among Latino College Students: The Mediating Roles of Ethnic Centrality, Public Regard, and Perceived Barriers to Opportunity

Parents?? efforts to socialize their children around issues of ethnicity and race have implications for well-being in several life domains, including academic and psychological adjustment. The present study tested a multiple mediator model in which parental ethnic-racial socialization was linked to psychological adjustment through two dimensions of ethnic identity (ethnic centrality and public regard) as well as two types of perceived barriers to opportunity (language and economic). Data were drawn from a sample of Latino students (N = 227; 65% women) attending a highly selective university. Results suggest that cultural socialization was related to self-esteem, depressive symptoms, and physical symptoms, and that part of its association with self-esteem was mediated by ethnic centrality beliefs. In contrast, preparation for bias had few direct associations with adjustment in this sample; this type of ethnic-racial socialization primarily functioned through its association with public regard and perceived language barriers to upward mobility. Moreover, in predicting self-esteem, public regard and perceived language barriers exhibited equally important roles as mediators of preparation for bias. These findings extend previous research, and implications for future research on ethnic-racial socialization among Latinos are discussed.