It is and it is not: the Importance of Context when Exploring Gender Differences in Perpetration of Physical Partner Violence

The literature on gender differences in perpetration of physical partner violence (PV) consists of two opposing camps: those who emphasize gender symmetry, and those who emphasize gender asymmetry. We propose a both/and approach to this controversy by suggesting that the issue of gender symmetry is complex and dependent upon context. Furthermore, we discuss how the role of personal investment in political agendas contributes to this divide in the literature. We argue that this both/and approach to inquiry will significantly contribute to the understanding of gender differences in perpetration of PV, as well inform the development of interventions for PV.     

A psychometric typology of U.K. domestic violence offenders

A number of studies have described subtypes of domestically violent men, and the heterogeneity of domestically violent men is well established. The aim of the current study was to investigate the distribution of subtypes using psychometric measures in convicted domestically violent offenders in England. Four subtypes of offenders were identified: low pathology, borderline, narcissistic, and antisocial. These subtypes were broadly comparable with the family-only, dysphoric/borderline, and generally violent/antisocial types proposed by Holtzworth-Munroe and Stuart. The majority of the sample (60%) best fit the generally violent/antisocial profile. However, the reliance on psychometric measurement and lack of corroborative evidence from partners means that further research is necessary to test these findings.     

The European Union and Human Rights: Towards A Post-National Human Rights Institution?

There is growing evidence that the European Union (EU) is becomingmore involved in human rights protection and has the capacityto turn into an unprecedented post-national human rights protectioninstitution. Based on that evidence, this article suggests differentarguments in favour of a further development in this direction.These arguments stem not only from a general global justiceapproach to post-national institutions’ responsibilities,but also from the concept of human rights itself and the specificneeds of human rights protection at the post-national level.The EU's institutional framework presents advantages that fitthe general criteria of institutional design in the human rightscontext. Of course, many doubts and critiques may be raisedagainst an entity which started primarily as a functional andeconomic institution, and important reforms, some of which areventured in the present article, are still needed to get theEU closer to this institutional ideal. More generally, the articleemphasises the unique example and precedent the EU may constitutefor normative institutional thinking about global justice atthe post-national level.     

Proof of Concept Centers in the United States: an exploratory look

In this paper we identify the population of 32 US university-related Proof of Concept Centers (PoCCs), and we present a model of technology development that identifies the economic role of PoCCs within that model. We examine the broad technology transfer challenges that PoCCs have been established to address. Further, we argue that PoCCs are a growing technology infrastructure in the United States, and they are important as a possible element of our national innovation system.     

Criteria-Based Content Analysis: An empirical test of its underlying processes

Abstract

Criteria-Based Content Analysis (CBCA) is a tool to assess the veracity of written statements, and is used as evidence in criminal courts in several countries in the world. CBCA scores are expected to be higher for truth tellers than for liars. The underlying assumption of CBCA is that (i) lying is cognitively more difficult than truth telling, and (ii) that liars are more concerned with the impression they make on others than truth tellers. However, these assumptions have not been tested to date. In the present experiment 80 participants (undergraduate students) lied or told the truth about an event. Afterwards, they completed a questionnaire measuring “cognitive load” and “tendency to control speech”. The interviews were transcribed and coded by trained CBCA raters. In agreement with CBCA assumptions, (i) truth tellers obtained higher scores than liars, (ii) liars experienced more cognitive load than truth tellers, and (iii) liars tried harder to control their speech. However, cognitive load and speech control were not correlated with CBCA scores in the predicted way.