Testing a measure of organizational learning capacity and readiness for transformational change in human services

Transformative organizational change requires organizational learning capacity, which we define in terms of (1) internal and (2) external organizational systems alignment, and promoting a culture of learning, including (3) an emphasis on exploration and information, (4) open communication, (5) staff empowerment, and (6) support for professional development. We shortened and adapted Watkins and Marsick's Dimensions of Learning Organizations Questionnaire into a new 16-item Organizational Learning Capacity Scale (OLCS) geared more toward nonprofit organizations. The OLCS and its subscales measuring each of the above 6 dimensions are unusually reliable for their brevity. ANOVAs for the OLCS and subscales clearly and consistently confirmed extensive participant observations and other qualitative data from four nonprofit human service organizations and one local human service funding organization.     

Probing the Depths of the Responsible Corporate Officer’s Duty

Many criminal law scholars have criticized the responsible corporate officer doctrine as a form of strict and vicarious liability. It is neither. It is merely a doctrine that supplies a duty in instances of omissions. Siding with Todd Aagaard in this debate, I argue that a proper reading of the cases yields that the responsible corporate officer doctrine is just duty supplying, and does not allow for strict liability when the underlying statute requires mens rea. After analyzing Dotterweich, Park, and their progeny, I probe the depths of this duty-supplying doctrine, including to whom the duty is owed, whether the duty is grounded in statute, cause of peril, or contract, and what the content of the duty is. Although the responsible corporate officer doctrine unveils questions we may have about duty generally, it is no more problematic than other duty-supplying doctrines in the criminal law.     

Beliefs about secondary confession evidence: a survey of laypeople and defense attorneys

We surveyed students, community members, and defense attorneys regarding beliefs about secondary confession evidence (i.e. when a third party tells authorities that a person has confessed to him or her) from jailhouse informants and other sources. Results indicated that laypeople perceive secondary confessions as less credible than other types of evidence (e.g. forensics, DNA, eyewitness testimony), and they are knowledgeable about factors that may influence the veracity of secondary confessions, such as incentives or previous testimony. However, they underestimated or were uncertain about how persuasive secondary confessions would be to themselves or other jurors. Compared to laypeople, defense attorneys were more sensitive about issues affecting the reliability of secondary confessions.     

Differences between multisite postmortem ethanol concentrations as related to agonal events

In a study of postmortem ethanol concentrations, blood was withdrawn from the right atrium, ascending aorta, and inferior vena cava. These samples, vitreous humor, and gastric fluid were analyzed in 307 autopsies, where a minimum blood ethanol concentration of 0.05% weight/volume (w/v) was present. Premortem, agonal, and postmortem events were reviewed in an attempt to account for differences in blood ethanol concentrations between sites. The agonal aspiration of vomitus having at least 0.80% w/v ethanol appears to be associated with an increase in aortic ethanol concentrations. We conclude that valid interpretation of postmortem ethanol concentrations must take into consideration the possible entry of ethanol into the pulmonary venous circulation via the respiratory system.     

A critical review of published competency-to-confess measures

The development of standardized assessments for competency-to-confess evaluations has remained largely neglected for the last several decades. Groundbreaking research was conducted on Miranda waivers during the late 1970s, but researchers have failed to sustain programmatic research. This critical review focuses on four published Miranda measures (Comprehension of Miranda Rights, Comprehension of Miranda Rights-Recognition, Comprehension of Miranda Vocabulary, and Function of Rights in Interrogation). When evaluated by contemporary standards, the validation of these measures is very limited. Major improvements are needed for interrater reliability, test-retest reliability, content validity, construct validity, and criterion-related validity.     

Conservative Perspectives on American Federalism: Introduction

Conservatives were regularly criticized by liberals and othersfor their approach to federalism throughout the twentieth century.This trend began during the Progressive era, when the justicesof the "Lochner Court" were vilified for using national judicialpower to strike down local regulations. Several decades later,conservative opposition to New Deal programs was seen as insensitiveand elitist. Arguments for constitutional limitations on executivepower in the 1930s were attributed to the greed of businessmenand corporations. During the 1950s and 1960s, the conservativedefense of states' rights was explained by other unpleasantmotivations. Opposition to national civil rights laws was, formany, analogous to fondness for Jim Crow and other forms ofracial subjugation. Since the 1980s, conservative members ofthe Rehnquist Court have been denounced from various quartersfor their federalist perspectives. According to the Court'scritics, specious arguments about state sovereignty have beenused to rescind national rights and benefits.     

Fighting back: Lethal responses to predatory attacks

Each year millions of Americans become victims of predatory crimes. The way victims respond to these attacks varies from complicance with offenders' requests to physically challenging offenders. In some cases, the physical defense of self and property has lethal consequences for the initial offender. While much is known about felony murder victims and typical homicide offenders, little is known about individuals who fight back against predatory attack by using lethal violence. In this paper, we use data from the Homicides in Chicago, 1965–1995 study to describe the characteristics of defensive homicide offenders and to determine how they compare with felony murder victims and defensive homicide offenders. Our results indicate that defensive homicide offenders are more similar to typical homicide offenders than felony murder victims, and are even more likely to have violent criminal histories and to use firearms than typical homicide offenders. Our results challenge the common perception that individuals who fight back against predatory attack are simply “law-abiding citizens.” We conclude the paper with a discussion of the implications of our study for additional research and police practice. Authors' Note: The authors thank editor Dennis Stevens and James Black for their helpful comments on earlier draft of the paper.     

The effects of multiple objectives in the theory of public sector supply

This paper incorporates objectives of both legislators and bureaucrats in a model of public sector decisionmaking. Existing models assume that either bureaucrats control production information and decisions, (Niskanen-type models) or legislators control production decisions (legislative models). My model explicitly incorporates imperfect agent behavior and corresponding preferences of both legislators and bureaucrats to reflect the bilateral nature of appropriations. The analysis shows that output levels generally differ from politically and socially efficient levels and depend on the relative weights of legislative and bureaucratic interests. Accordingly, Niskanen-type and legislative models are viewed as special cases of this more general approach.     

Older and more recent evidence on racial discrimination in sentencing

Examination of previous studies of racial discrimination in sentencing indicates more widespread evidence of discrimination than allowed in three separate reviews by M. J. Hindelang [(1969).J. Crim. Law Criminal. Police Sci. 60: 306–313], J. Hagan [(1975). InThe Aldine Crime and Justice Annual, Aldine, Chicago], and G. Kleck [(1981).Am. Social. Rev. 46: 783-805]. It is not the case, as these reviewers suggest, that racial discrimination is a thing of the past, shown almost exclusively for capital offences from the American South, and often supported only because relevant legal variables were not controlled. In addition, analysis of recent (1977) data from a non-Southern state (Pennsylvania) covering noncapital offenses and including recommended controls shows that evidence of racial disparity in sentencing is revealed more clearly when separate analyses are conducted within levels of urbanization. The labeling perspective and conflict theory guide our interpretation.