The Power of Prestige: Explaining China’s Nuclear Weapons Decisions

ABSTRACT

The majority of the nuclear proliferation literature is dedicated to understanding why states acquire nuclear weapons. While this question remains important, it is also advantageous to push beyond this inquiry to ask what motivates a state’s nuclear decisions after acquisition. Recent research indicates that a state’s nuclear force structure is heavily influenced by its threat environment. But what explains decisions relating to specific nuclear weapon systems? If security is a sufficient explanatory variable, then why would a state pursue nuclear weapons with high development and production costs but relatively low security gains? Using China as a case study, this article explores the power of prestige in explaining such decisions.     

Do PCL-R scores from state or defense experts best predict future misconduct among civilly committed sex offenders?

In a recent study of sex offender civil commitment proceedings, Murrie et al. (Psychol Public Policy Law 15:19-53, 2009) found that state-retained experts consistently assigned higher PCL-R total scores than defense-retained experts for the same offenders (Cohen's d > .83). This finding raises an important question about the validity of these discrepant scores: Which type of score, state or defense evaluator, provides the most useful information about risk? We examined the ability of PCL-R total scores from state and defense evaluators to predict future misconduct among civilly committed sex offenders (N = 38). For comparison, we also examined predictive validity when two state experts evaluated the same offender (N = 32). Agreement between evaluators was low for cases with opposing experts (ICCA,1 = .43 to .52) and for cases with two state experts (ICCA,1 = .40). Nevertheless, scores from state and defense experts demonstrated similar levels of predictive validity (AUC values in the .70 range), although scores from different types of state evaluators (corrections-contracted vs. prosecution-retained) did not. The finding of mean differences between opposing evaluator scores, but similar levels of predictive validity, suggests that scores from opposing experts in SVP cases may need to be interpreted differently depending on who assigned them. Findings have important implications for understanding how rater disagreement may relate to predictive validity.     

Property rights and competing for the affections of?Demos: the impact of the 1867 Reform Act on stock prices

The 1867 Reform Act in Britain extended the electoral franchise to the skilled but propertyless urban working classes. Using stock market data and exploiting the fact that foreign and domestic equities traded simultaneously on the London market, this paper finds that investors in British firms reacted negatively to the passage of this Act. We suggest that this finding is consistent with investors foreseeing future alterations of property rights arising from the pressure that the large newly enfranchised group would bring to bear on government policy. We also suggest that our findings appear to be more consistent with the Tory political competition explanation for the Act rather than the Whig threat-of-revolution explanation.     

Self-Reported Intentions to Offend: All Talk and No Action?

To study criminal decision making, researchers commonly present hypothetical offending scenarios to participants and record their self-reported intentions to offend (SRIO). These SRIO scores are treated as an indicator of participants?? predisposition to commit the act described in the scenario. Drawing from the field of clinical measurement, the current study examines the diagnostic accuracy of SRIO scores by comparing participants?? intentions to acquire illegal music files from a designated distributor to their actual attempts to acquire such files. Approximately 7% of participants who read about a (bogus) music piracy opportunity reported strong??and at times definitive??intentions to seek out the illegal files. However, in actuality, no one in the study engaged in this behavior. Clinimetric indicators suggest that SRIO scores are better at predicting abstention from crime than actual criminal participation.     

Does providing inmates with education improve postrelease outcomes? A meta-analysis of correctional education programs in the United States

Objectives

Our study addresses the question: Does providing inmates with education while incarcerated reduce their chances of recidivism and improve their postrelease employment prospects?

Methods

We aggregated 37 years of research (1980–2017) on correctional education and applied meta-analytic techniques. As the basis for our meta-analysis, we identified a total of 57 studies that used recidivism as an outcome and 21 studies that used employment as an outcome. We then applied random-effects regression across the effect sizes abstracted from each of these studies.

Findings

When focusing on studies with the highest caliber research designs, we found that inmates participating in correctional education programs were 28% less likely to recidivate when compared with inmates who did not participate in correctional education programs. However, we found that inmates receiving correctional education were as likely to obtain postrelease employment as inmates not receiving correctional education.

Conclusion

Our meta-analysis demonstrates the value in providing inmates with educational opportunities while they serve their sentences if the goal of the program is to reduce recidivism.

     

Specialist domestic violence courts for child arrangement cases:safer courtrooms and safer outcomes?

ABSTRACT

Child arrangement cases in England and Wales are dealt with in the ordinary family courts. Whilst a special practice direction is applicable to child arrangement proceedings where there are allegations of domestic abuse, there is no specialist domestic violence court in the family justice setting. However, court specialisation is a feature of the criminal justice system and has been demonstrated to have success in domestic violence cases. Some of the potential benefits of specialisation, such as the provision of safer courtrooms, might be transferable to the family justice setting. Given the well documented problems of ordinary courts dealing with child arrangements in domestic violence cases, this article considers whether court specialisation could provide victims with safer courtrooms and safer outcomes in child arrangement cases.