Gender and Gender-Role Orientation Differences on Adolescents' Coping with Peer Stressors

Gender and gender-role orientation differences were explored on adolescents' coping with peer stressors. Eighth-grade and ninth-grade public junior high school students (N = 285) completed the COPE, reporting the strategies they recently used to deal with a stressful peer-related situation. Measures of gender-role orientation (Bem Sex-Role Inventory) and demographic information also were obtained. Factor analysis of the COPE revealed 4 distinct coping factors: active, avoidant, acceptance, and emotion-focused. The most frequently reported stressful event was arguments/fights with same-sex friends. Girls reported more arguments/fights with opposite-sex friends. Boys reported more physical fights and threats. Students' ratings of how much the situation mattered were used as a covariate in a MANCOVA to compare coping by gender and gender-role orientation, to control for perceived stressfulness of situations. Significant gender-role orientation differences were found for active, acceptance, and emotion-focused coping.     

The Civil Service under One Country, Two Systems: The Cases of Hong Kong and the People's Republic of China

Under the principle of "one country, two systems," Hong Kong's and China's civil services are changing, but they clearly are not converging. The civil service reforms made in Hong Kong and China appear to be heading toward two logical extremes: one toward strengthening political authority over the civil service, and the other instituting greater institutionalization. What appears to be a problem in Hong Kong may be seen as a solution in China. Not only reform problems, but also reform options, are defined in relation to wider political institutions and changing socioeconomic dynamics. The study shows that while some things do need to be uniform, such as loyalty to the state and central government, a great deal of flexibility regarding administrative systems within one country is possible. There can be a modern nation without a truly national civil service.     

Voting May Be Habit-Forming: Evidence from a Randomized Field Experiment

Habit is a frequently mentioned but understudied cause of political action. This article provides the first direct test of the hypothesis that casting a ballot in one election increases one's propensity to go to the polls in the future. A field experiment involving 25,200 registered voters was conducted prior to the November general election of 1998. Subjects were randomly assigned to treatment conditions in which they were urged to vote through direct mail or face-to-face canvassing. Compared to a control group that received no contact, the treatment groups were significantly more likely to vote in 1998. The treatment groups were also significantly more likely to vote in local elections held in November of 1999. After deriving a statistical estimator to isolate the effect of habit, we find that, ceteris paribus, voting in one election substantially increases the likelihood of voting in the future. Indeed, the influence of past voting exceeds the effects of age and education reported in previous studies.     

A Priori Voting Power: What Is It All About?

We explain the meaning of a priori voting power and outline how it is measured. We distinguish two intuitive notions as to what voting power means, leading to two approaches to measuring it. One conception, I-power, focuses on a voter's potential influence over the outcome of decisions by a voting body. The second conception, P-power, focuses on voters' payoff, their expected share of a fixed winning 'prize'. We discuss and rebut some philosophical and pragmatic objections, according to which a priori (as distinct from actual) voting power is worthless or inapplicable.     

Cross-National Concepts in Supranational Governance: State–Society Relations and EU Policy Making

The emergence of multiple and shifting modes of governance both intranationally and supranationally has posed difficulties for analysts accustomed to refining or testing singular types of politics. When confronted with this changing complexity, a comprehensive framework can be a very useful diagnostic and organizational tool. This article devises one such conceptual framework to clarify and systematize varieties of state autonomy and state–society relations. By combining fundamental conceptions of action, elemental control mechanisms, and basic types of interaction, a comprehensive framework is constructed for characterizing and comparing governance modes in a conceptually coherent manner. Many of the abstract spaces within this conceptual field share affinities with types of state autonomy and state–society relations depicted in major theoretical approaches to national politics (i.e., authoritarianism, statism, pluralism, corporatism, institutionalism, and Marxism). This article uses this conceptual framework to systematize these major governance modes and to illuminate their coexistence in supranational governance by examining the European Union policy process.     

Good Enough Governance: Poverty Reduction and Reform in Developing Countries

The good governance agenda is unrealistically long and growing longer over time. Among the multitude of governance reforms that "must be done" to encourage development and reduce poverty, there is little guidance about what's essential and what's not, what should come first and what should follow, what can be achieved in the short term and what can only be achieved over the longer term, what is feasible and what is not. If more attention is given to sorting out these questions, "good enough governance" may become a more realistic goal for many countries faced with the goal of reducing poverty. Working toward good enough governance means accepting a more nuanced understanding of the evolution of institutions and government capabilities; being explicit about trade-offs and priorities in a world in which all good things cannot be pursued at once; learning about what's working rather than focusing solely on governance gaps; taking the role of government in poverty alleviation seriously; and grounding action in the contextual realities of each country.