A validation study for duct tape end matches

Fracture matches are considered to be the strongest association achievable in forensic examinations of glass, metal, wood, plastic, paint, tape, and other trace evidence. Despite being fairly routine examinations, few publications exist to support their admissibility in court. This study was designed, using duct tape as the fractured medium, to determine the validity and error rate associated with conducting end match (fracture match) examinations on this material. Five test designs, which varied either the source roll of tape or manner of separation (torn or cut) from the roll, were administered to four analysts with instructions to examine the assigned test sets for end matches. If an end match was not identified by the initial analyst, the entire test set was independently evaluated by the remaining three analysts. Results indicated that while tape grade did not hinder end match identification, the manner of separation could affect results.     

The self-concept of homeless adolescents

Thirty adolescents who had lived away from home for at least six months were compared on self-concept with 120 adolescents living at home. The latter group was divided into equal numbers of adolescents who were employed, unemployed, school students, and college students. The Offer Self-image Questionnaire for Adolescents was used to measure self-concept. Other measures used were the Beck Depression Inventory, the Hopelessness Scale of Beck et al.,and the Rotter Internal External Locus of Control Scale. These were used to examine the relationship between deficits in self-concept and psychopathology. Environmental factors such as family relationships, employment, school achievement, and friendships were also examined. It was found that homeless adolescents demonstrated significant deficits in five areas of self-concept and a specific pattern of deficits was related to hopelessness. Results were discussed with reference to the theory that acting-out behavior mitigates the impact of affective disturbance on self concept.Received her master's of clinical psychology from Macquarie University, Australia. Major interest is adolescent psychopathology and clinical work with homeless adolescents.     

Imagining (the) Difference: Gender,Ethnicity and Metaphors of Nation

This article critiques the way in which three feminist authors reinscribe traditional liberal values when seeking new ways of thinking about the nation. It suggests that in rejecting affective or embodied metaphors, such as community or kinship, the authors fall into the trap of reinscribing values which have historically excluded women and ethnic or racial minorities from full participation in the polity. The article argues for a rejection of the affect/rationality model which underpins these arguments and suggests that new metaphors for the nation will emerge as those who have been excluded claim a place in the polity.     

Perspective and procedural justice: Attorney and litigant evaluations of court procedures

A comparison of the procedural justice judgments of attorneys and those of lay people judging the same procedures offers an opportunity to generate new information on what factors affect judgments of fairness. In a survey of reactions to conventional and innovative procedures in a United States district court, attorneys and lay people involved in tort and contract cases were asked to judge the overall fairness of court procedures and the fairness of specific procedures used in arbitration hearings. The respondents were also asked for their judgments concerning the favorability of the procedure's outcome, the opportunity to have the case heard and decided by an impartial third party, and their side's control over what happened in the case, all of which are factors found in previous studies to affect procedural fairness judgments. The results showed that, while attorneys gave higher overall fairness ratings than did litigants, the difference was not affected by the procedure assigned to the case. In addition, attorneys and litigants appeared to use the same standards to evaluate the fairness of procedures, although they disagreed about where the procedures they experienced fell on these dimensions. The theoretical and practical implications of the results are discussed.