Reviews

Anders Aslund, How Russia Became a Market Economy. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution, 1995, xviii + 378 pp., £25.75/£9.95.

Boris Kagarlitsky, Restoration in Russia: Why Capitalism Failed. London: Verso, 1995, 172 pp., £39.95/£11.95.

Simon Clarke (ed.), Management and Industry in Russia: Formal and Informal Relations in the Period of Transition. Aldershot: Edward Elgar, 1995, xii + 244 pp. £45.00.

Jan Adam, Why Did the Socialist System Collapse in Central and Eastern European Countries? The Case of Poland, the Former Czechoslovakia and Hungary. London: Macmillan, 1996, xii + 244 pp., £40.00.

? Bogeti? & Arye L. Hillman (eds), Financing Government in the Transition: Bulgaria. The Political Economy of Tax Policies, Tax Bases, and Tax Evasion. Washington, DC: The World Bank, 1995, xv + 254 pp., £19.95.

Vladimir Tismaneanu (ed.), Political Culture and Civil Society in Russia and the New States of Eurasia. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe, 1995, xiii + 384 pp., $22.95.

Alexander Maksimovich Yakovlev, Striving for Law in a Lawless Land—Memoirs of a Russian Reformer. New York: M. E. Sharpe, 1996, xvi + 237 pp., $62.95.

Tuomas Forsberg (ed.), Contested Territory: Border Disputes at the Edge of the Former Soviet Empire. Aldershot: Edward Elgar, 1995, xi + 267 pp., £45.00.

Graham Smith (ed.), The Nationalities Question in the Post‐Soviet States. London: Longman, 1996, xiv + 524 pp.

Aleksandr’ G. Savel'yev & Nikolai N. Detinov, The Big Five: Arms Control Decision‐making in the Soviet Union. Westport, CT: Praeger, 1995, xiv + 204 pp., £47.95.

Keith L. Nelson, The Making of Detente: Soviet‐American Relations in the Shadow of Vietnam, Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1995, xvii + 217pp., £29.00.

George Ginsburgs, Alvin Z. Rubinstein & Oles M. Smolansky (eds), Russia and America: From Rivalry to Reconciliation, New York: M. Sharpe, 1993, xi + 353 pp.

Diego Cordovez & Selig S. Harrison, Out of Afghanistan: The Inside Story of the Soviet Withdrawal. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995, ix + 450 pp., $35.00.

Andrei S. Grachev, Final Days. The Inside Story of the Collapse of the Soviet Union. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1995, xviii + 222 pp., £22.50.

Ilya Prizel & Andrew A. Michta (eds), Polish Foreign Policy Reconsidered. Challenges of Independence. Basingstoke, Macmillan, 1995, xiii + 174 pp., £25.00.

James Riordan, Christopher Williams & Igor Uynsky (eds), Young People in Post‐Communist Russia and Eastern Europe. Aldershot: Dartmouth, 1995, xvi + 215 pp., £39.50.

James von Geldern & Richard Stites (eds), Mass Culture in Soviet Russia: Tales, Poems, Songs, Movies, Plays and Folklore 1917–1953. Bloomington and Indianapolis, IN: Indiana University Press, 1995, xxix + 492 pp., £39.50 h/b, £19.50 p/b.

Katerina Clark, Petersburg, Crucible of Cultural Revolution. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1995, xii + 377 pp., £25.50.

Anna Feldman Leibovich, The Russian Concept of Work: Suffering, Drama, and Tradition in Pre‐ and Post‐Revolutionary Russia. Westport, CT and London: Praeger, xv + 166 pp., £44.95.

R. Antony French. Plans, Pragmatism & People. The Legacy of Soviet Planning for Today's Cities. London: UCL Press, 1995, xi + 233 pp.

Roger Brunet, Denis Eckert & Vladimir Kolossov, Atlas de la Russie et des pays proches. Montpellier‐Paris: Reclus‐La Documentation Franchise, 1995, 208 pp., 220Ff.

Bruce Grant, In the Soviet House of Culture: A Century of Perestroikas. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1995, xvii + 225 pp., £12.00.

Michael Bourdeaux (ed.), The Politics of Religion in Russia and the New States of Eurasia, The International Politics of Eurasia, Volume 3. Armonk, NY and London: M.E. Sharpe, 1995, xiv + 321 pp., $49.95 h/b, $19.95p/b.     

The economic organization of legislatures and how it affects congressional voting

Congress confronts two major organizational problems that affect the behavior of legislators, party leaders, and groups doing business with congressional committees: The costly nature of monitoring and the absence of explicit mechanisms for upholding agreements. The problem of monitoring implies that party leaders will have a difficult time influencing decisions made in decision-making arenas where the actions of legislators are less visible, as in congressional committees. While legislators can evade leadership monitoring of their actions within committees, once an issue leaves a committee, the costs of monitoring decline, and leadership influence increases. The absence of mechanisms for assuring that legislators keep their bargains means that groups will place an emphasis on dealing with reliable legislators — those who can be counted upon to uphold their end of a bargain. Thus, party leaders are more effective in influencing floor voting because of their better ability to monitor legislator behavior; however, obligations to important interest groups will be more immune to leadership influence because of the incentives for committee members to adhere to their bargains.     

Reputational capital, opportunism, and self-policing in legislatures

This paper examines the question of whether reputational capital can deter opportunistic behavior among legislators preparing to exit the House of Representatives. I create a measure of reputational trustworthiness, based upon pooled samples of constituency opinion derived from the National Election Studies surveys. I then examine the extent to which such reputational good will among constituents deters lame-duck foreign travel by exiting House incumbents within the context of a quasi-experimental research design. The analysis suggests that legislators may be ‘self-policed’ by their reputations for honesty and trustworthiness to the point of discouraging unethical activity. urveys. I then examine the extent to which such s derived from the National Election Studies     

Opinion Taking within Friendship Networks

Communication within friendship networks can provide gains in efficiency that help individuals enrich their understanding of politics. Through two panel survey experiments, we demonstrate that the dissemination of an individual's opinion about the hazards posed by public policies can have both durable and significant effects on the policy judgments of friends. These effects are conditioned by both the content of the communication and the recipient's level of political awareness. Opinions emphasizing potential risks carry more weight than those that attempt to alleviate concerns about potential risks. Moreover, opinion transmission is more effective for subjects who are less politically aware when policy issues are salient; but when the political issue is more esoteric, friends who are more politically aware evidence greater opinion change.     

Managing incidental findings in human subjects research: analysis and recommendations.

No consensus yet exists on how to handle incidental findings (IFs) in human subjects research. Yet empirical studies document IFs in a wide range of research studies, where IFs are findings beyond the aims of the study that are of potential health or reproductive importance to the individual research participant. This paper reports recommendations of a two-year project group funded by NIH to study how to manage IFs in genetic and genomic research, as well as imaging research. We conclude that researchers have an obligation to address the possibility of discovering IFs in their protocol and communications with the IRB, and in their consent forms and communications with research participants. Researchers should establish a pathway for handling IFs and communicate that to the IRB and research participants. We recommend a pathway and categorize IFs into those that must be disclosed to research participants, those that may be disclosed, and those that should not be disclosed.     

Embracing the new professionalism: self-regulation, mandatory reporting and their discontents

In response to perceived failures in medical self-regulation in Australia, first in two States (for doctors) and now under the National Registration and Accreditation Scheme (for all health practitioners), mandatory reporting of peer status or practice that poses risks to patients has been introduced. Yet now, in response to the lobbying of State and federal health ministers by the medical profession, mainly in relation to the impairment provisions, this is to be reviewed. This column argues that claims concerning the negative consequences for practitioners of mandatory reporting are illogical and lack supporting evidence. There is, however, evidence that the medical profession does not consistently act in accordance with its professed positions in the area of physician impairment and departure from accepted clinical standards. The call for a review of mandatory reporting reflects an outdated model of regulation that does not align with increasing calls for a "new professionalism". In its own interests, but primarily in the interests of patients, the medical profession should embrace new attitudes and practices that will at first appear to threaten the privilege of self-regulation, but on proper scrutiny will be seen as necessary to retain it.