Gender Differences in Rates of Depressive Symptoms Among Low-Income,Urban, African American Youth: A Test of Two Mediational Hypotheses

The present study tested for gender differences in depressive symptoms in a sample of 622 low-income, urban, African American adolescents. Results indicate that adolescent girls in this sample were significantly more likely to endorse depressive symptoms than were boys. To examine possible explanations for this gender difference, 2 variables were tested as mediators of the relation between gender and depressive symptoms: (1) interpersonal stressors and (2) ruminative coping. Results indicate that ruminative coping, but not interpersonal stressors, mediated the relation between gender and depressive symptoms in this sample. Possible explanations for these findings, in light of the common and unique experiences of low-income, urban youth of color, are explored.     

Policy convergence and policy feedback: Agricultural finance policies in a globalizing era

Abstract In a comparative study of five countries: Australia, Canada, the Republic of Ireland, the UK, and the USA, this article examines the degree of convergence of agricultural credit policy content, policy instruments, and policy outcomes on a market liberal model. It shows that all five countries have moved toward market liberal policy arrangements over the past quarter century of globalizing and domestic fiscal pressures, but important differences in policy remain. The Republic of Ireland and the United Kingdom move further toward a market liberal model than do Australia, Canada, and the USA. The distinct national paths taken to market liberalism give rise to policy feedback that hastens or retards the adoption of a fully market liberal system. Historical choices of policy instruments and path dependence help account for continuing policy divergence.     

Policy Community Realism versus'New' Institutionalist Ambiguity

There has been widespread interest in the term 'institution' within political science in the past five years. Two principal uses of this are identified. The first is associated with the policy community literature and in this sense the institution is an extra-constitutional policymaking arrangement between ministries and clientelistic groups. The second use of the term is associated with state-centred authors who wish to argue for the relative autonomy of political institutions. In this second use there is ambiguity about the scope of the term institution; whether it is, or is not, intended to be confined to traditional institutions or whether the disaggregated state embraces the newer policy community phenomenon.     

The Australian Experience of Municipal Amalgamation: Asking the Citizenry and Exploring the Implications

Debate over municipal amalgamations in Australian continues to dominate local government reform agendas, with the putative need to achieve economies of scale and scope consistently set against anti‐amalgamation arguments designed to preserve extant communities. Following from an examination of recent episodes of consolidation in Australia, this paper reports on citizens' attitudes to amalgamation garnered from a national survey of 2,006 individuals. We found that generally, citizens are ambivalent toward amalgamation, although attitudes were influenced by particular demographic characteristics and attitudes to representation, belonging, service delivery requirements and the costs thereof. The results suggest that, away from the local government sector itself, structural reform may not be the vexatious issue it is often portrayed as. The implications of this are explored here.     

Norm dynamics and international organisations: South Africa in the African Union and International Criminal Court

Over the past two decades, South Africa has sought to perform several roles on the world stage, such as the economic dynamo of Southern Africa, a diplomatic heavyweight representing the African continent, and a norm leader on the world stage as a so-called ‘middle-power’. Although South Africa's evolution and rise as an important player in global affairs has generated a welcome body of critical scholarly literature, comparatively little analysis has been allocated to understanding how norm dynamics and the country's ever-evolving international identities have enabled it to construct and reconstruct its ‘interests’. Social constructivism is best suited for such an analysis because it can operationalise norms, commitments, identities, and interests, and it provides the epistemological tools to map the increasingly multilateral connections between global, regional, and domestic forums. By employing a rationalist approach to constructivism, this paper remedies the aforementioned gap in the literature by illustrating how South Africa constructs and reconstructs its identities and interests in relation to membership in international organisations (IOs). To that end, the paper examines the evolution of South Africa's participation in the African Union (especially ‘peacekeeping’ contributions) and the International Criminal Court. The paper concludes by assessing the theoretical implications and practical ramifications of the norm dynamics involved in South Africa's commitment to these two IOs.     

The Legal System and Child Sex Abuse—Ross Cheit's The Witch‐Hunt Narrative: Politics,Psychology, and the Sexual Abuse of Children

Cheit, Ross E. 2014 . The Witch‐Hunt Narrative: Politics, Psychology, and the Sexual Abuse of Children . New York: Oxford University Press. Pp. xvii + 508. $49.95 cloth. The prosecution of child sex abuse in cases involving very young children presents difficult problems for the justice system. Ross Cheit's book The Witch‐Hunt Narrative: Politics, Psychology, and the Sexual Abuse of Children (2014) addresses these problems in the context of the 1980s cases involving daycare centers. While the conventional conclusion drawn from these cases is that young children are not credible witnesses, Cheit's examination of the trial records in these cases reveals credible evidence of abuse in many, as well as evidence of injustice attributable to untrained and/or overenthusiastic interviewers. Cheit's examination of this litigation provides an opportunity to evaluate the legal system's treatment of child witnesses in sex abuse cases, as well as to discuss the appropriate use of social scientific evidence in litigation, the impact of mass media accounts on public policy, and the respective merits of criminal versus civil lawsuits in child sex abuse cases.     

The Effects of Substance Use on Offender Crime Scene Behavior

Abstract:  Substance use has an effect on an individual's propensity to commit acquisitive crime with recent studies showing substance users more likely to leave forensic material at a crime scene. An examination of acquisitive crime solved in Northamptonshire, U.K., during 2006 enabled 70 crime scene behavior characteristics to be analyzed for substance and nonsubstance use offenders. Logistical regression analyses have identified statistically significant crime scene behavior predictors that were found to be either present at or absent from the crime scene when the offender was a substance user. Most significant predictors present were indicative of a lack of preparation by the offender, irrational behavior, and a desire to steal high value, easily disposed of, property. Most significant predictors absent from the crime scene were indicative of more planning, preparation, and execution by the offender. Consideration is given to how this crime scene behavior might be used by police investigators to identify offenders.     

Ethical decisions at the edge

Medicine grows incrementally in its ability to treat patients and at the growing edge it poses problems about the appropriateness of treatments that are different from those where good practice conforms to widely agreed standards. The growth of access to medical knowledge and the diversity of contemporary theoretical and clinical medicine have spawned deep divisions in the profession and divergent opinions about what constitutes reasonable care. That hallmark of acceptable practice is also under pressures from the threat of litigation, a highly commercialised contemporary medical environment, patient demands based on medical journalism and the internet and the exponential growth of bio-medical technology. Patient empowerment can result in complaints arising in new and complex areas and expert opinion can often differ markedly depending on where on the medical spectrum the experts are aligned. This column lays out some broad-brush principles to assess the adequacy of medical advice in such a climate.     

The impact of judges' perceptions of credibility in fibromyalgia claims

Fibromyalgia (FM) is a confusing and controversial diagnosis, characterized by widespread pain and tenderness at specific anatomical sites. The cause of this syndrome is unknown, and the course of the condition is difficult to predict. Without a known cause, predictable course, or effective treatment, it is not surprising that FM is a contentious diagnosis from a medical perspective, as well as a civil litigation and disability insurance industry perspective. The purpose of this study was to investigate judges' perceptions of credibility in litigated cases involving FM claims in the Canadian courts, and the relation between perceived credibility and awards granted. A systematic review was conducted of every trial-by-judge litigated FM claim in Canada (N=194 cases) up to 2003. The cases were examined in relation to credibility factors. The role and responsibility of the plaintiff was central in claims involving issues of misrepresentation, fraud, non-disclosure, failure to mitigate, and contributory negligence. The presence of these issues suggested a possible decrease or loss in the claim as a result of the plaintiff's conduct. In regards to the actions of defendants, the presence of investigative and surveillance information alone did not affect the awards granted. However, the credibility of that information had a large effect on the amount of award granted. Plaintiff credibility played a similar role, indicating that plaintiffs perceived as more credible were typically granted greater awards. An examination of medical expert credibility revealed that judges appear to perceive experts as more credible overall than plaintiffs, regardless of the expert's role in the case.