Risk and Protective Factors for Peer Victimization in Adolescents with ADHD

ABSTRACT

Youth with ADHD are more at-risk for peer victimization than their typically developing peers, and may not be benefiting from current interventions. Thus, we sought to examine risk (i.e., anxiety, depression, and forms of aggression) and protective (i.e., social skills and social acceptance) factors for peer victimization in this group. Participants were 123 young adolescents diagnosed with ADHD, who were attending grades six through eight. We found that relational aggression (i.e., excluding others from activities) and anxiety symptoms were among the strongest risk factors for victimization. Anxiety symptoms were associated with victimization over and above depressive symptoms. Social acceptance buffered risk conferred by the risk factors. Future work is needed to investigate the degree to which the relations among internalizing symptoms and victimization differ in youth with ADHD relative to typically developing youth, and assess causality of the relations.     

Who should I look at? Eye contact during collective interviewing as a cue to deceit

Pairs of liars and pairs of truth tellers were interviewed and the amount of eye contact they made with the interviewer and each other was coded. Given that liars take their credibility less for granted than truth tellers, we expected liars to monitor the interviewer to see whether they were being believed, and to try harder to convince the interviewer that they were telling the truth. It was hypothesised that this monitoring would manifest itself through more eye contact with the interviewer and less eye contact with each other than in the case of truth tellers. A total of 43 pairs of participants took part in the experiment. Truth tellers had lunch in a nearby restaurant. Liars took some money from a purse, and were asked to pretend that instead of taking the money, they had been to a nearby restaurant together for lunch. Pairs of liars looked less at each other and displayed more eye contact with the interviewer than pairs of truth tellers. The implications of these findings are discussed.     

Highly Sensitive Detection of Blood by Surface Enhanced Raman Scattering,,

Raman spectroscopy for forensic body fluid analysis has received some attention due to the nondestructive nature and potential application for identification at the crime scene; however, its usage has been limited by low detection sensitivity. Surface enhanced Raman scattering (SERS) was evaluated for blood identification for forensic applications. Specifically, a SERS‐active substrate was fabricated, composed of nickel nanotips coated with Ag nanoparticles. Compared with a conventional substrate, the SERS substrate enhanced Raman scattering by more than two orders of magnitude and allowed blood to be identified to a dilution of 1:100,000. Blood was also successfully detected by swabbing the SERS substrate directly on mock evidence. Most importantly, Raman spectra obtained by swabbing the SERS substrate on blood stains were free of luminescence even when blood was deposited on luminescent fabrics. The nondestructive character, simplicity of sample preparation, and high sensitivity make SERS a prime candidate for field and laboratory‐based blood identification.     

Using Hawkins's Surround,Field, and Frames Concepts to Understand the Complexities of Special Measures Decision Making in Crown Court Trials

Adjustments to criminal trial processes, called special measures, are available to vulnerable and/or intimidated witnesses giving evidence. Findings from interviews with 13 criminal practitioners suggest that there are notable variations in the uptake of special measures between prosecution witnesses, defence witnesses, and the accused in Crown Court trials. These extend beyond any inequality in their legal provision. This article uses Keith Hawkins's conceptual framework of surround, field, and frames as a heuristic device to understand this differential uptake. The framework delineates the various factors – including the socio‐political, organizational, and attitudinal – which can influence decision‐making practices in relation to special measures. In doing so, this article demonstrates two things. First, that changing the legal provision is unlikely to effect much change in practice, absent specific complementary changes to the field. Second, that Hawkins's framework has potential as an explanatory device in decision‐making contexts outside his own health and safety setting.     

The persistence of collective guilt

Abstract

This paper asks why, despite the obvious difficulties entailed, the notion of ‘collective guilt’ continues to feature in discussions of the responsibilities of one group towards another. The aim is to clarify how it is that the partial success of repeated attempts to distinguish individual from collective guilt and to confine the latter to a pre-modern moment reveals something of our present. The key contributions to this discussion made by Hannah Arendt and Karl Jaspers in relation to Nazi Germany are examined for their ambivalences in this regard, as are some recent developments in international law and politics. The suspicion is that collective guilt is a notion that modern political reason cannot embrace and yet which it cannot entirely disavow: ‘collective guilt’ and the element of fate that it implies is central to our understanding of citizenship, nationhood and political commitment. The paper thus attempts an analysis of the durability of the concept of collective guilt; it is not an evaluation of its usefulness, but an exploration of its persistence.