Need-efficiency trade-offs in the allocation of resources: Ideological and attributional differences in public aid decision making

We examined whether ideological differences influenced perceptions of the underlying causes of public aid applicants’ predicaments, and whether in turn ideology-patterned attributions accounted for how resource allocators prioritized need- and efficiency-related goals in allocating aid. To examine the need-efficiency trade-off, participants (N=112) divided a hypothetical pool of aid applicants for subsidized health insurance into two “incorrect” allocation outcomes: false alarms (allocate aid to unneedy applicants) and misses (deny aid to needy applicants). Moreover, to examine beliefs about the absolute percentage of aid applicants who are truly in need of societal assistance, participants divided the remaining aid applicants into two “correct” allocation outcomes: hits (allocate aid to needy applicants) and correct rejections (deny aid to unneedy applicants). Results of a series of structural equation models indicated that conservatism was linked to the causal belief that aid applicants’ predicaments arise from dispositional rather than situational factors, which in turn predicted a preference for making efficiency-related over need-related resource allocation judgments (e.g., preferring misses to false alarms) and the belief that a relatively small number of aid applicants are truly in need of societal assistance (e.g., preferring correct rejections to hits). Results are discussed in terms of how ideologically driven attributions influence the manner in which people resolve need-efficiency trade-offs inherent in the context of public aid decision making.     

Elevated and similar urinary testosterone/epitestosterone ratio in all samples of a competition testing: suspicion of a manipulation

The case of seven urine samples collected for anti-doping purposes during a cycling stage race with moderately elevated testosterone and epitestosterone ratio (T/E) is reported. The very low probability of having all seven urine samples with such similar elevated T/E ratio (from 3.2 to 4.7) was very suspicious. Different pattern classification tools were tested to categorize the most similar steroid profiles, but none of the models enabled a clear classification of the different urine samples. Subsequently, genetic profiling of all urine samples was performed and demonstrated that three of the seven samples were collected from the same cyclist. Finally, the International Federation confirmed DNA profiling results. This suggests that urinary steroid data using several methodologies are not appropriate for identification purposes and to an extent not unique to individuals.     

Relinquishing custody as a requisite for receiving services for children with serious emotional disorders

A review of the literature was conducted to assess the extent and nature of the practice of requiring parents to transfer custody in order to receive public funding for intensive services needed by their child/adolescent who had a serious emotional disorder. The review focused on the legal and policy basis of this practice as well as its social and psychological impact on child and family. We conclude that the practice of transfer of custody as a requirement for receiving financial aid occurs in a majority of states, though the actual extent of this practice is not known. The major factor influencing the use of transfer of custody appears to be the absence of an appropriate and adequate system of services for children and adolescents with serious emotional disorders. We recommend that the practice of requiring custody transfer for the sole purpose of receiving services be abolished and offer several suggestions for improving acess to services.Preparation of this article was supported in part by the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) under contract no. 89MF761903. The authors are grateful to John Burke and Kelly Kelleher of the Division of Biometry and Applied Sciences, NIMH for their assistance on this project. Laurie Flynn, Executive Director for the National Alliance for the Mentally Ill, was very helpful during the informative stage of the project. Barbara Friesen, Director of the Research and Training Center at Portland State University, gave us useful guidance throughout the project. We thank Stephen Hill, Consultant to the National Governors' Association, for his help. We are grateful to Amy Hewitt and Carol Ishler for their assistance in preparing this report. We also would like to acknowledge several individuals who assisted us with research reported in this article. We are grateful to Governor Richard F. Celeste of Ohio for his letter of support for the state survey of custody transfer practices. We appreciate the efforts on behalf of this survey by staff from the State of Ohio, particularly Jean Ellen Stevens, Administrative Assistant to the Director of the Department of Mental Health. Margraret McNally assisted in the compilation of data for both surveys.