Current Controversies Concerning Gender Differences in Perpetration of Physical Partner Violence

The article provides a general background for this special issue, describing its starting point and goals, and their implementation guidelines.     

How Can We End the Stigma Surrounding Domestic and Sexual Violence? A Modified Delphi Study with National Advocacy Leaders

The purpose of this study was to use a modified Delphi methodology study to identify priority actions that can be taken at the individual, local, and national levels to eliminate the stigma surrounding domestic and sexual violence. An expert panel of national organizational leaders provided input about the nature of the stigma surrounding domestic and sexual violence, as well as strategies to end this stigma. The findings were organized into three themes: (a) the social context of the stigma surrounding domestic and sexual violence; (b) the impact of the stigma on resources for victims and survivors; and (c) strategies for eradicating the stigma surrounding domestic and sexual violence. Implications of the study’s findings for research, practice, and advocacy are discussed.     

Policy horizons in West European parliamentary systems

Abstract This paper investigates the hypothesis that coalition behaviour in West European parliamentary systems is conditioned by the existence of 'policy horizons' that delimit the extent to which parties can compromise on policy positions in order to participate in government. The first part of the paper demonstrates that policy horizons are implied by certain conceptions of party utility and that their existence would entail important constraints on the coalition game; in particular, they would produce equilibrium outcomes in some situations where voting cycles would normally be expected and they would tend to confine possible outcomes to central locations in the policy space in the absence of equilibria. The paper then develops a method of estimating policy horizons empirically in order to show that they account to a substantial extent for both the size and party composition of governing coalitions in these systems.     

Gender differences in intended escalatory tendencies among marital partners

This study addresses the intended escalatory tendency in eight hypothetical situations in which the provocator's identity (partner or stranger, male or female) and the provocation form (verbal or physical aggression) were manipulated. The research question is "how does the identity of the provocator and the form of his or her provocation affect the participant's intended escalation level, and does the gender of the participant affect differences in intended escalation level?" The research sample consisted of 208 Israeli couples. The main finding is that women's intended response to their male partner is more escalatory than men's intended response to their female partner. Results also show that women's escalation is the most severe to partner provocation and the least severe to male strangers' provocation. Men's escalation is the most severe to provocation by male strangers and the least severe to their partner's provocation. Findings indicate that men's intention to escalate decreases as their partner's provocation becomes more severe. The severity of provocation has little effect on women's inten-tion to escalate. Such results are consistent with social role theory and sexual selection theory that maintain that status enhancement is more important for men than for women, and is more important for men than risk reduction is, whereas the opposite is true for women.     

Behind closed doors: the effect of pretrial publicity on jury deliberations

Abstract

Effective treatment of aggressive behaviour and accurate release decision making are necessary components of adequate clinical practice in forensic psychiatric units. Unfortunately, methods to identify treatment targets and ameliorate aggressive behaviour have developed at a slower pace than risk assessment technologies. Recent progress on the identification of offence paralleling or functionally equivalent behaviour offers a framework for individually tailored treatment and idiographic release decision making, although empirical scrutiny of this approach is inadequate. This paper describes an examination of the relationship between aggressive behaviour prior to admission with aggression during inpatient psychiatric treatment, and reconviction for violent offending following discharge. Results showed a relationship between pre- and post-admission aggression but no relationship between aggression during inpatient psychiatric treatment with either pre-admission aggressive behaviour or violent recidivism. These findings indicate the importance of state psychological variables, specifically those states affected by symptoms of psychiatric illness, as well as environmental activators and inhibitors of violence that operate within the hospital. These require inclusion in an adequate functional analysis of aggressive behaviour for forensic psychiatric patients.     

Investigating the relationship between justice‐vengeance motivations and punitive sentencing recommendations

Purpose. The present research investigated the relationship between underlying justice and vengeance motivations and sentencing recommendations made by expert clinicians, semi‐experts, and lay‐people. It was hypothesized that the semi‐experts would recommend significantly different sentence lengths from those recommended by the expert and lay‐person groups, in line with previous research findings. It was also hypothesized that justice and vengeance motivations would be related to punitive sentencing recommendations, and that these would not be the same across the three levels of expertise. Method. An independent groups design was utilized in the main analysis, with participants belonging to three distinct levels of clinical experience (experts, semi‐experts, and lay‐people). A questionnaire was administered, with participants being measured on levels of justice and vengeance motivations, and asked to recommend appropriate sentence lengths based on nine separate crime‐scenarios. These covariables were correlated and the correlation coefficients were compared across the three levels of expertise. Results. The former hypothesis was not upheld. Findings do, however, support the latter hypothesis, with the key finding indicating that for both justice and vengeance motivations in punitive judgement, it is the lay‐participants who appear distinct from the experts and semi‐experts. Conclusions. The current findings emphasize that while expert and lay‐person judgements may often appear to be the same, different processes and motivations underlying clinical judgements are occurring at the different stages of expertise. With the differences in the relationships between justice and vengeance motivations and judgements found in the current research, it is argued that expert and lay judgements that appear to be the same are, in fact, distinguishable and are related to quite different underlying motivations and decision‐making processes.     

Understanding Public Sector Ethics: Beyond Agency Theory in Canada's Sponsorship Scandal

ABSTRACT

Public sector ethics is a topic of ongoing concern in developed democracies. The most popular theoretical approach to this issue is found in principal–agent theory literature. This approach assumes that public sector organizations are populated by principals and agents, each of whom pursue their own self-interest, with agents having a persistent informational advantage. A second approach to ethical conflicts focuses on cognitive processes. According to cognitive theory, all decision makers are vulnerable to “ethical numbing,” particularly in organizational settings that condone the substitution of personal agendas for organizational goals. We argue that Canada's sponsorship scandal has been interpreted almost exclusively from a principal–agent perspective, with subsequent reforms firmly based on introducing new rules to oblige agents to advance the interests of principals. While more faithful adherence to established rules by agents would have avoided a scandal, such adherence is unlikely to be achieved through incentives, monitoring, and penalties as suggested by principal–agent theory. The policy message contained in and implied by the cognitive framework suggests that the focus must be on creating an organizational learning environment that discourages responsible public officials from reframing decision situations in a manner that allows them to become morally disengaged.