Partisan News and Political Participation: Exploring Mediated Relationships

This study examines mediators of the relationship between news consumption and political participation in the contemporary news environment. We test the differential effects exerted by pro- and counter-attitudinal news compared with balanced news on intended participation. Our primary objective is to model three paths that may link news exposure and participation: cognitive (i.e., perceived issue understanding), affective (i.e., emotions evoked by a news story), and attitudinal (i.e., attitude strength). We compare these paths across four issues, testing which is strongest. Relying on a large survey-based experiment on a representative sample of the American population (N = 2,300), we find that pro-attitudinal exposure increases intended participation relative to balanced news exposure, while the effects of counter-attitudinal news do not differ from those exerted by balanced news. Issue understanding, anger, positive emotions, and attitude strength all mediate the relationship between pro-attitudinal exposure and intended participation, with the route via attitude strength being strongest. These effects do not depend on whether exposure is self-selected or experimentally assigned.     

Malingering by Proxy: A Literature Review and Current Perspectives

Malingering by proxy (MAL‐BP) is a form of maltreatment that involves a caregiver who fabricates or induces signs or symptoms in a child, dependent adult, or pet in pursuit of external, tangible incentives. Rarely studied, MAL‐BP has an unknown prevalence, and is a challenging diagnosis for healthcare professionals. Therefore, a comprehensive computer literature search and review was conducted. The review uncovered a total of sixteen case reports of MAL‐BP (eleven human, five veterinary). The motive for malingering was financial in all human cases and medication‐seeking in all veterinary cases. Although the strategies employed differed among the identified cases, common themes regarding the best approach to identification of MAL‐BP cases became evident. A comprehensive workup including a thorough history, physical examination, appropriate neuropsychological testing, and relevant collateral information forms the basis of an effective identification strategy. The optimal method of management is currently unclear due to a relative paucity of data and guidelines. However, management of these cases would likely include a team‐based approach with a prudent assessment of safety for the proxy and a low threshold for referral to appropriate services. Long‐term follow‐up is essential and should be approached from a biopsychosocial perspective. Attention, research, and guidance on this topic are needed to develop further evidence‐based guidelines for the identification and management of MAL‐BP.     

Threat, Anxiety, and Support of Antiterrorism Policies

The perception of threat and the experience of anxiety are distinct but related public reactions to terrorism. Anxiety increases risk aversion, potentially undercutting support for dangerous military action, consistent with terrorists' typical aims. Conversely, perceived threat increases a desire for retaliation and promotes animosity toward a threatening enemy, in line with the usual goals of affected governments. Findings from a national telephone survey confirm the differing political effects of anxiety and perceived threat. The minority of Americans who experienced high levels of anxiety in response to the September 11 attacks were less supportive of aggressive military action against terrorists, less approving of President Bush, and favored increased American isolationism. In contrast, the majority of Americans who perceived a high threat of future terrorism in the United States (but were not overly anxious) supported the Bush administration's antiterrorism policies domestically and internationally.     

Racial Resentment and White Opposition to Race‐Conscious Programs: Principles or Prejudice?

White racial resentment is associated with opposition to a broad range of racial policies but it is unclear whether it derives from racial prejudice or stems from ideological principles. To resolve this ambiguity, we examined the impact of racial resentment on support for a college-scholarship program in which program beneficiaries' race and socioeconomic class was experimentally varied. The analyses yield a potentially troubling finding: racial resentment means different things to white liberals and conservatives. Among liberals, racial resentment conveys the political effects of racial prejudice, by predicting program support for black but not white students, and is better predicted by overt measures of racial prejudice than among conservatives. Among conservatives, racial resentment appears more ideological. It is closely tied to opposition to race-conscious programs regardless of recipient race and is only weakly tied to measures of overt prejudice. Racial resentment, therefore, is not a clear-cut measure of racial prejudice for all Americans.     

Should Judges Justify Recourse to Broader Contexts When Interpreting Statutes?

International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique - Courts purport to abandon ordinary meaning only when words in a statute accommodate more than...     

Reinventing Government: City Manager Attitudes and Actions

With the aim of helping move research from rhetoric to empirical reality, this article reports results of a national survey of city managers on attitudes towards and actions taken to implement principles of reinventing government. A large majority of managers support key principles of reinvention. A smaller proportion of managers has taken actions to recommend adoption of reinvention programs in their budget proposals to council. Managers' action-taking is influenced by certain characteristics of city managers, their communities, and their governments, including managers' attitudes and experiences, slack resources, and region.     

Decentralized enforcement in organizations: An experimental approach

Social enforcement, the decentralized action by organizational actors of monitoring, identifying, and reporting legal violations, is widely recognized as a key factor in ensuring good governance. This article reports on an experimental survey conducted in the US and Israel examining the behavior of individuals when confronting workplace unlawful conduct. The study provides novel insights into the relationships between state based, organization based, and employee based enforcement. It finds that the likelihood and the manner of reporting will vary depending on the type of illegality and are strongly correlated to perceptions of legitimacy, job security, and voice within the workplace. Comparing illegalities, employees prefer to report clear violations by rank and file employees rather than violations by managers. At the same time, external reporting to government or media entities is most likely when violations involve the organization as a whole or implicate top management. The study also finds cultural and gender differences in reporting patterns. Finally, the study provides support for the understanding that social norms are more predictive of social enforcement than expected organizational costs.