全文获取类型
收费全文 | 221篇 |
免费 | 22篇 |
专业分类
各国政治 | 9篇 |
工人农民 | 44篇 |
世界政治 | 19篇 |
外交国际关系 | 14篇 |
法律 | 123篇 |
中国政治 | 2篇 |
政治理论 | 31篇 |
综合类 | 1篇 |
出版年
2022年 | 3篇 |
2021年 | 3篇 |
2020年 | 11篇 |
2019年 | 17篇 |
2018年 | 20篇 |
2017年 | 17篇 |
2016年 | 26篇 |
2015年 | 12篇 |
2014年 | 10篇 |
2013年 | 47篇 |
2012年 | 10篇 |
2011年 | 5篇 |
2010年 | 5篇 |
2009年 | 6篇 |
2008年 | 12篇 |
2007年 | 6篇 |
2006年 | 5篇 |
2005年 | 6篇 |
2004年 | 3篇 |
2003年 | 4篇 |
2002年 | 7篇 |
2001年 | 2篇 |
2000年 | 1篇 |
1999年 | 2篇 |
1998年 | 1篇 |
1996年 | 1篇 |
1974年 | 1篇 |
排序方式: 共有243条查询结果,搜索用时 0 毫秒
61.
62.
Four presumptive blood tests, Hexagon OBTI, Hemastix(R), Leucomalachite green (LMG), and Kastle-Meyer (KM) were compared for their sensitivity in the identification of dried bloodstains. Stains of varying blood dilutions were subjected to each presumptive test and the results compared. The Hexagon OBTI buffer volume was also reduced to ascertain whether this increased the sensitivity of the kit. The study found that Hemastix(R) was the most sensitive test for trace blood detection. Only with the reduced buffer volume was the Hexagon OBTI kit as sensitive as the LMG and KM tests. However, the Hexagon OBTI kit has the advantage of being a primate specific blood detection kit. This study also investigated whether the OBTI buffer within the kit could be utilized for DNA profiling after presumptive testing. The results show that DNA profiles can be obtained from the Hexagon OBTI kit buffer directly. 相似文献
63.
James McGuire Charlotte A. L. Bilby Ruth M. Hatcher Clive R. Hollin Juliet Hounsome Emma J. Palmer 《Journal of Experimental Criminology》2008,4(1):21-40
This paper reports the outcome of a 17-month follow-up of structured, community-based, offence-focused, intervention programmes
designed to reduce rates of re-conviction amongst adjudicated offenders under probation supervision. Three separate programmes
were examined, all derived from a cognitive social learning model of risk factors for repeated involvement in crime. Using
a quasi-experimental design, the study compared male offenders who had completed programmes (n = 215) with a non-completion group (n = 181), a group allocated to programmes but who had not commenced them (n = 339), and a control sample (n = 194) not allocated to the programmes. Outcome data analysis employed (a) an “intent to treat” between-group comparison,
(b) “treatment received” methodology. In order to take account of selection bias, data were further analysed using instrumental
variables and propensity scores; results suggested a possible treatment effect for moderate and higher-risk cases. Factors
influencing different interpretations of these findings were considered.
James McGuire is Professor of Forensic Clinical Psychology and Director of the Doctor of Clinical Psychology programme at the University of Liverpool, UK. He also holds an honorary post as consultant clinical psychologist in Mersey Care NHS Trust. He has conducted research in probation services, prisons, and other settings on aspects of psychosocial interventions with offenders; and has written or edited 14 books and numerous other publications on this and related issues. He worked for some years in a high-security hospital and has carried out psycho-legal work involving assessment of offenders for courts, for hearings of the Mental Health Review Tribunal, the Parole Board, and for the Criminal Cases Review Commission. In addition he has been involved in a range of consultative work with criminal justice agencies in the UK, Sweden, Romania, Canada, Australia and Hong Kong. Charlotte Bilby is a Lecturer in Criminology at the University of Leicester. Her research interests include the role and politics of evaluation in UK criminal justice policy making, offenders’ experiences of probation and the processes of offender rehabilitation, reform and management. Ruth Hatcher is a Lecturer in Forensic Psychology at the University of Leicester. Her research interests include the evaluation of offending behaviour programmes within community and custodial settings, the investigation of predictors and correlates of attrition from community offending behaviour programmes, bullying behaviour within custodial settings, and the psychological impact of working with forensic populations. Clive R. Hollin is Professor of Criminological Psychology in the School of Psychology at The University of Leicester, UK. He wrote the best-selling textbook Psychology and Crime: An Introduction to Criminological Psychology (1989, Routledge). His most recent book, edited with Emma Palmer, is Offending Behaviour Programmes: Development, Application, and Controversies (2006, John Wiley & Sons). He is co-editor of the journal Psychology, Crime, & Law. Alongside his various university appointments, he has worked as a psychologist in prisons, special hospitals, and regional secure units. In 1998 he received The Senior Award for Distinguished Contribution to the Field of Legal, Criminological and Forensic Psychology from The British Psychological Society. Juliet Hounsome graduated with a B.Sc. in Applied Psychology from John Moores University, Liverpool, in 1997 and obtained an M.Sc. in Psychological Research Methods from Lancaster University in 1999. She subsequently worked at the Centre for Public Health, John Moores University, conducting research on the trends of drug misuse in Merseyside over a 10-year period. From 2002 until 2005 she held research posts, first at Liverpool and then as a Fellow at Leicester University, working on a large-scale re-conviction study funded by the Home Office that aimed to evaluate the National Probation Directorate Pathfinder programmes. Her current post is as a systematic reviewer with the Liverpool Reviews and Implementation Group, conducting assessments for the Health Technology Assessment Programme and the National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence. Emma J. Palmer is a Reader in Forensic Psychology at the University of Leicester. Her research interests include the roles of parenting and social cognition (including moral reasoning) in the development of offending, assessment of offender risk and need, the design and evaluation of interventions for offenders, and interpersonal violence among prisoners. She has recently co-edited a book with Clive Hollin titled Offending Behaviour Programmes: Development, Applications, and Controversies (2006, Wiley). 相似文献
James McGuireEmail: |
James McGuire is Professor of Forensic Clinical Psychology and Director of the Doctor of Clinical Psychology programme at the University of Liverpool, UK. He also holds an honorary post as consultant clinical psychologist in Mersey Care NHS Trust. He has conducted research in probation services, prisons, and other settings on aspects of psychosocial interventions with offenders; and has written or edited 14 books and numerous other publications on this and related issues. He worked for some years in a high-security hospital and has carried out psycho-legal work involving assessment of offenders for courts, for hearings of the Mental Health Review Tribunal, the Parole Board, and for the Criminal Cases Review Commission. In addition he has been involved in a range of consultative work with criminal justice agencies in the UK, Sweden, Romania, Canada, Australia and Hong Kong. Charlotte Bilby is a Lecturer in Criminology at the University of Leicester. Her research interests include the role and politics of evaluation in UK criminal justice policy making, offenders’ experiences of probation and the processes of offender rehabilitation, reform and management. Ruth Hatcher is a Lecturer in Forensic Psychology at the University of Leicester. Her research interests include the evaluation of offending behaviour programmes within community and custodial settings, the investigation of predictors and correlates of attrition from community offending behaviour programmes, bullying behaviour within custodial settings, and the psychological impact of working with forensic populations. Clive R. Hollin is Professor of Criminological Psychology in the School of Psychology at The University of Leicester, UK. He wrote the best-selling textbook Psychology and Crime: An Introduction to Criminological Psychology (1989, Routledge). His most recent book, edited with Emma Palmer, is Offending Behaviour Programmes: Development, Application, and Controversies (2006, John Wiley & Sons). He is co-editor of the journal Psychology, Crime, & Law. Alongside his various university appointments, he has worked as a psychologist in prisons, special hospitals, and regional secure units. In 1998 he received The Senior Award for Distinguished Contribution to the Field of Legal, Criminological and Forensic Psychology from The British Psychological Society. Juliet Hounsome graduated with a B.Sc. in Applied Psychology from John Moores University, Liverpool, in 1997 and obtained an M.Sc. in Psychological Research Methods from Lancaster University in 1999. She subsequently worked at the Centre for Public Health, John Moores University, conducting research on the trends of drug misuse in Merseyside over a 10-year period. From 2002 until 2005 she held research posts, first at Liverpool and then as a Fellow at Leicester University, working on a large-scale re-conviction study funded by the Home Office that aimed to evaluate the National Probation Directorate Pathfinder programmes. Her current post is as a systematic reviewer with the Liverpool Reviews and Implementation Group, conducting assessments for the Health Technology Assessment Programme and the National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence. Emma J. Palmer is a Reader in Forensic Psychology at the University of Leicester. Her research interests include the roles of parenting and social cognition (including moral reasoning) in the development of offending, assessment of offender risk and need, the design and evaluation of interventions for offenders, and interpersonal violence among prisoners. She has recently co-edited a book with Clive Hollin titled Offending Behaviour Programmes: Development, Applications, and Controversies (2006, Wiley). 相似文献
64.
Does tariff liberalization cause regulatory chill by putting downward pressure on health, safety, and environmental standards? Or does it cause a race to the top as governments seek to use standards as nontariff barriers to trade? There remains remarkably little empirical evidence to answer these long-debated questions. We seek to address this lack by analyzing annual country-by-industry data on notifications of changes in sanitary and phytosanitary standards by world trade organization members. Our results suggest that the impact of increased trade pressure depends on whether domestic producers are likely to gain or lose from a change in standards. Regulatory chill is the dominant response in most countries, but countries in which producers can adapt to standards relatively cheaply appear to race to the top. Consequently, tariff liberalization encourages divergence in standards across countries. 相似文献
65.
Despite mainstream criminology’s burgeoning interest in issues of race, class, and gender, very little scholarship has examined whiteness and its attendant privileges in understanding public discourse on criminal offenders. This paper examines the role of penal spectatorship as a discursive mechanism by which white, female offenders are protected in public spaces by virtue of their racial and gender identity. Using a content analysis of comments posted on the mug shot images of white women on a popular ‘mug shot website,’ we find that these women are viewed as victims of circumstance deserving of empathy and redemption rather than as criminals. We offer ‘white protectionism’ as a means by which whites extend privilege and protection to other whites who transverse the boundaries of whiteness through criminality to guard against ‘deviant’ or ‘criminal’ designations. These findings add to our understandings of penal spectatorship as yet another tool of white supremacy operating in the Post-Civil Rights era of mass incarceration. 相似文献
66.
67.
68.
Emma Harries 《Intelligence & National Security》2017,32(2):161-178
The ticking-bomb scenario is a thought experiment designed to establish the moral permissibility of interrogational torture in a limited number of circumstances on utilitarian grounds. This article demonstrates that utilitarianism does not support the use of torture in any circumstances, not only because another method of interrogation is more efficient and effective, but also because the practice of interrogational torture undermines individual security and, in turn, the ability of authorities to provide collective security. Therefore, utilitarianism demands the absolute prohibition of torture. 相似文献
69.
Emma Govan 《Women & Performance》2013,23(2):147-159
70.