An Assessment of the “Eggshell Psyche” in Simulated Civil Litigation

The eggshell plaintiff rule dictates that in the event that a defendant causes some amount of damage, he or she also becomes liable for all of the plaintiff’s injuries, including any unforeseeable harm. The present study investigated whether adults who may have an “eggshell psyche” due to childhood abuse endorse more symptoms of trauma after a simulated motor vehicle accident than individuals without a history of abuse. Participation in litigation was also examined as a potential stressor over and above the experience of a traumatic event. The results confirm that an individual’s abuse history was related to elevated symptom reports. However, the type of abuse and the litigation context did not incrementally contributed to symptom reports. Results have implications for attorneys, psychological expert witnesses, and plaintiffs who have a history of trauma.     

Understanding stalinism—the ‘Orwellian discrepancy’ and the ‘rational choice dictator’

This discussion article examines the logical bases of the arguments often encountered in the literature that compares Soviet and Nazi totalitarianism. It analyses the ‘Orwellian discrepancy’ between Marxist ideals and Soviet reality, the comparative differences in numbers of people that were murdered by the Stalin and Hitler regimes, and the distinction between ‘murder’ and ‘execution’ that is sometimes applied to the actions of the two tyrants. It then examines the notion of Stalin as a ‘rational choice’ dictator who, through the use of state-sponsored terror, was simply ensuring the survival of his regime, and suggests that a better model for Stalin's government would be that of ‘pseudo-rational choice irrationality’. Arguments that imply that ‘Team Stalin’ should not be seen as a totalitarian corporate form of government because of some attempted reforms and recently revealed institutional complexity are also considered. It concludes by reaffirming the importance of understanding human belief and intellectual factors to a comprehension of historical development.     

Punishment and Permissibility in the Criminal Law

The United States Supreme Court has repeatedly insisted that what distinguishes a criminal punishment from a civil penalty is the presence of a punitive legislative intent. Legislative intent has this role, in part, because court and commentators alike conceive of the criminal law as the body of law that administers punishment; and punishment, in turn, is conceived of in intention-sensitive terms. I argue that this understanding of the distinction between civil penalties and criminal punishments depends on a highly controversial proposition in moral theory – namely, that an agent’s intentions bear directly on what it is permissible for that agent to do, a view most closely associated with the doctrine of double effect. Therefore, legal theorists who are skeptical of granting intention this kind of significance owe us an alternative account of the distinctiveness of the criminal law. I sketch the broad outlines of just such an alternative account – one that focuses on the objective impact of legislation on a class of protected interests, regardless of the state’s motivations in enacting the legislation. In other words, even if the concept of punishment is unavoidably intention-sensitive, it does not follow that the boundaries of the criminal law are likewise intention-sensitive, because the boundaries of the criminal law may be drawn without reference to the concept of punishment. I conclude by illustrating the application of this view to a pair of well-known cases, and noting some of its ramifications.     

The connection of police strategies for coping with workplace problems to stress in two countries

This research examined the direct effects of coping strategies on stress and the moderating effects of coping strategies on the associations between workplace problems experienced by police and stress in South Korea and the United States. Data revealed that coping strategies did not change the strength of connections between workplace problems and stress. Especially in the United States, the use of escape as a coping strategy was related to high stress. Findings were most consistent with the use of organizational-level interventions to increase police officers' job control and advancement opportunities, and pointed to the need to consider support as a way to limit stress.     

Non-market Returns to Traditional Human Capital: Nutritional Status and Traditional Knowledge in a Native Amazonian Society

Soviet Agricultural and Peasant Affairs. Edited by Roy D. Laird London: Constable &; Co. 1964, xiv, 335 pp. 60/‐

India's Export Trends and the Prospects for Self‐Sustained Growth. By Manmohan Singh. Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1964, pp. xiv + 370. 45s.

The Political Economy of Mexico. By W. P. Glade and C. W. Anderson. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, 1963. Pp. xii, 242, $5.     

Book Review

Theorists have argued that discussion and disagreement are essential components of sound public opinion, and indeed that both are necessary for effective democracy. But their putative benefits have not been well tested. Consequently, this article examines whether disagreement in political conversation contributes to opinion quality--specifically, whether it expands one's understanding of others' perspectives. Data are drawn from a survey of the American public ( N = 1,684) conducted in February and March 2000. Open-ended survey measures of "argument repertoire"--reasons people can give in support of their own opinions, as well as reasons they can offer to support opposing points of view--are examined in light of numerous explanatory variables, including the frequency of political conversation and exposure to disagreement. Results confirm the hypothesis that exposure to disagreement does indeed contribute to people's ability to generate reasons, and in particular reasons why others might disagree with their own views.     

Experiencing Community Psychology Through Community-Based Learning Class Projects: Reflections From an American University in the Middle East

Many introductory community psychology courses do not incorporate community-based learning (CBL), and when they do, it is most often in the form of individualized volunteer hours. We present an alternative model for CBL in which the entire class collaborates on an experiential project that promotes community action. We believe that such an approach better embodies the values and methods of the discipline and has a more powerful impact on the students and stakeholders. It may be especially effective in developing countries that do not have an established network of service infrastructures; in such nations the onus is on the teachers and learners of community psychology to contribute to transformative change. In this article practical guidelines are provided by the instructor regarding how to structure and implement this CBL model. Additionally, two students describe how the CBL experience solidified their learning of course concepts and significantly impacted them personally.     

COVID,crisis, and unordinary order: A critical analysis of Australia’s JobKeeper wage subsidy scheme as an exceptional measure

Carl Schmitt’s famous articulation of the relation between sovereignty and the exception emphasises not simply the basis for a suspension of the law in a state of emergency, but the role of the sovereign in deciding upon the existence of the ‘normal situation’, the ‘everyday frame of life’ which the law requires to function. Our pandemic times have included extreme biopolitical measures deployed to manage the health crisis, but also unprecedented political responses to regularise or stabilise the economic order. One example is Australia’s historic JobKeeper wage subsidy scheme. As law, it was given life by an executive power predicated on nationhood and enlivened by crisis. As policy, it was intended to help businesses retain workers through targeted, proportionate support. In reality, it also provided significant protections and even windfalls to corporations and their investors, leading to critiques of the scheme as corporate welfare. However, rather than highlighting deficiencies of the JobKeeper programme, these outcomes underscore its ultimate function. This article analyses the relationship between norm, exception, and order in the context of Australia’s flagship economic-policy response to the pandemic. First, by analysing the mutually constitutive relationship between norm and exception, employing the theories of Carl Schmitt and Giorgio Agamben. Second, by critically examining the legislative basis for JobKeeper, its political narrative and practical outcomes. Third, by demonstrating that the scheme, though an extraordinary departure from policy, can be understood as fundamentally a different and exceptional method to secure and reproduce our neoliberal corporate order in a state of exception.