Exciting discoveries on the health effects of family violence: where we are, where we need to go

In the 20 years since the founding of the Journal of Interpersonal Violence, there have been exciting new discoveries on the long-term physical health effects of family violence. As exciting as these discoveries have been, we still know little about why the experience of family violence makes people sick. Some of the most promising areas of study on this topic will be in neuroscience, sleep studies, and cognitive variables such as hostility. Once we understand mechanisms, we can design interventions that can ameliorate these effects.     

Parricides in the media: a content analysis of available reports across cultures

This article is a content analysis of news reports of parricide cases occurring worldwide. An extensive search of online databases found coverage of more than 200 cases of children killing parents reported in the news media. Data pertaining to incidents, case-related variables (e.g., weapons used, other charges), and the processing of offenders from the initial charge through conviction and sentencing are examined. To the extent possible, media accounts are used to classify cases according to motive and Heide's three types of parricide offenders. Twelve significant differences are discussed between U.S. and non-U.S. cases of parricide with respect to characteristics of parricide incidents, motives and other areas of clinical interest in reported parricide offenders, and Heide's typology. The article concludes with a discussion of media representations of the phenomenon versus the actual occurrence, several observations that emerged from these news accounts, and directions for future research.     

What's in a word?

In this paper, we argue that citizens' views about the personality characteristics of their political leaders are subject to systematic bias, motivated by the desire to maintain existing impressions. We report two studies designed to explore how such trait biases, involving judgments of real politicians, are manifested. Drawing on work in social psychology (John, Hampson, and Goldberg, 1991), we hypothesize, and demonstrate experimentally, that traitbreadth plays a critical role in the judgment process. Specifically, people tend to select broad positive traits (e.g., kind) and narrower negative traits (gullible) to describe politicians that they like; conversely, people tend to select broad negative traits (unintelligent) and narrower positive traits (soft-hearted) to describe politicians that they dislike. This trait breadth attribution bias was much stronger among those who had a positive, rather than negative, impression of the politician, a result we discuss in the context of related evidence of affective asymmetries in political judgment (e.g., Kinder, 1986; Marcus and Mackuen, 1993). More generally, these studies illustrate the potential associated with integrating cognitive, affective, and motivational factors in the service of fully understanding political judgment and choice.