Regulating Autonomy: An Assessment of Policy Language for Highly Automated Vehicles

Self‐driving cars (also known as driverless cars, autonomous vehicles, and highly automated vehicles [HAVs]) will change the regulatory, political, and ethical frameworks surrounding motor vehicles. At the highest levels of automation, HAVs are operated by independent machine agents, making decisions without the direct intervention of humans. The current transportation system assumes human intervention though, including legal and moral responsibilities of human operators. Has the development of these artificial intelligence (AI) and autonomous system (AS) technologies outpaced the ethical and political conversations? This paper examines discussions of HAVs, driver responsibility, and technology failure to highlight the differences between how the policy‐making institutions in the United States (Congress and the Public Administration) and technology and transportation experts are or are not speaking about responsibility in the context of autonomous systems technologies. We report findings from a big data analysis of corpus‐level documents to find that enthusiasm for HAVs has outpaced other discussions of the technology.     

The consequences of respondent attrition in panel studies: A simulation based on the Rochester youth development study

Subject attrition is a potentially serious threat to the validity of inferences drawn from panel studies of delinquency and drug use. Prior assessments of this issue produce somewhat conflicting results, with some finding that respondents who leave the panel have higher rates of delinquency and drug use than those who remain, while other studies report little or no differential attrition. Despite these findings, there has been virtually no examination of the extent to which respondent attrition can bias substantive findings in panel studies of delinquency and drug use. The present article addresses this issue by simulating higher levels of attrition in an ongoing panel study that has a low rate of attrition and little differential attrition. It finds that failure to include more elusive respondents (those who are more mobile) would bias estimates of prevalence and frequency of delinquency and drug use as well as results from basic regression analyses. Failure to include less cooperative respondents (those who require more contacts) produces similar, but somewhat smaller, differences. The methodological implications of the results are discussed.     

Structural anomie and crime: a cross-national test

Anomie is a highly prominent theoretical construct in macro-social, particularly cross-national, criminological inquiry. Yet despite its prominence, it has proven to be quite elusive with regard to its measurement and, hence, making it nearly impossible to test theoretical hypotheses regarding its predictive efficacy. Although the concept, whether derived from Merton's classic conceptualization or from its current incarnation in the form of institutional anomie as developed by Messner and Rosenfeld, is multidimensional and complex in its theoretical structure, most researchers have attempted to operationalize it through simple, single-item, often surrogate/proxy measures. The present research note attempts to develop a measure that is more consistent with its multidimensional and complex nature. This more complex operationalization is then examined with regard to its efficacy at predicting cross-national levels of both homicide and theft. Our results suggest that that this new operationalization has considerable predictive efficacy, accounting for approximately one third of the variation in the cross-national level of both homicide and theft.     

An Examination of Defendant Sex Disparity in Capital Sentencing: A Propensity Score Matching Approach

Although much prior work has examined the influence of extralegal factors on jury capital sentencing decision-making, the influence of defendant sex has been largely omitted from previous investigations. Using propensity score matching methods, the current study analyzes data from the North Carolina Capital Sentencing Project to examine whether “sex matters” in capital sentencing. Findings demonstrated that prior to matching there was a significant difference in the likelihood of receiving the death penalty for female and male defendant cases; however, after matching cases on an array of legal and extralegal case characteristics, these differences were no longer significant. Further results revealed that male defendants’ cases included different aggravating and mitigating factors than female defendants’ cases and that female defendants had limited “paths” to capital trials. Findings suggest that any apparent sex effects that are observed in capital sentencing stem from real differences in the case characteristics found in female and male defendants’ cases rather than any direct effects of defendant sex on jury decision-making. Study limitations and implications for death penalty research are also discussed.     

John Stuart Mill's Theory of Bureaucracy within Representative Government: Balancing Competence and Participation

The relationship between bureaucracy and representative government has been a subject of concern to public administration since its inception. John Stuart Mill addressed this question in an 1861 essay, in which he explained his theory of government. Mill suggests a role for public administration that is not only legitimate, but also necessary for good government. His writings contain remarkable references to the concerns addressed in current theories of public administration. Mill worked to balance the spirit of popular government with governance by the most educated, skilled, and experienced of the nation, whether they were citizens, elected representatives, or administrative officials. This article examines Mill's theory and the contribution it makes to current public administration discussion.