Power groups,interests and interest groups in consolidated and transitional democracies: comparing Uruguay and Costa Rica with Paraguay and Haiti

Drawing on a representative sample of four countries, this article compares two related aspects of interest group activity across Latin America. First, it identifies the elements that determine the level of interest group system development and types of group activity across the region; and second it provides insights into the relationship of the level of institutionalization of a group system to the extent of the consolidation of democracy. The representative sample is composed of Uruguay and Costa Rica in comparison with Paraguay and Haiti. These are four countries with small populations that cover the spectrum of levels of socioeconomic and political development across Latin America, from Uruguay, one of the most developed, to Haiti one of the least developed. The article argues that across a spectrum of group development in Latin America, advanced systems have more or less integrated characteristics, whereas less developed ones manifest a dual or bifurcated group activity. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The nature of human aggression

Human aggression is viewed from four explanatory perspectives, derived from the ethological tradition. The first consists of its adaptive value, which can be seen throughout the animal kingdom, involving resource competition and protection of the self and offspring, which has been viewed from a cost–benefit perspective. The second concerns the phylogenetic origin of aggression, which in humans involves brain mechanisms that are associated with anger and inhibition, the emotional expression of anger, and how aggressive actions are manifest. The third concerns the origin of aggression in development and its subsequent modification through experience. An evolutionary approach to development yields conclusions that are contrary to the influential social learning perspective, notably that physical aggression occurs early in life, and its subsequent development is characterized by learned inhibition. The fourth explanation concerns the motivational mechanisms controlling aggression: approached from an evolutionary background, these mechanisms range from the inflexible reflex-like responses to those incorporating rational decision-making.     

Aggression control therapy for violent forensic psychiatric patients: method and clinical practice

Aggression control therapy is based on Goldstein, Gibbs, and Glick's aggression replacement training and was developed for violent forensic psychiatric in- and outpatients (adolescents and adults) with a (oppositional-defiant) conduct disorder or an antisocial personality disorder. First, the conditions for promoting "treatment integrity" are examined. Then, target groups, framework, and procedure are described in detail, followed by the most important clinical findings during the period 2002 to 2006. Finally, new programme developments are mentioned, with aggression control therapy as a starting point.     

Behind the consociational screen: Politics in contemporary Switzerland

Existing approaches do not aid understanding of current developments in Switzerland because of their acceptance of consociationalism. This is less convincing and relevant than has been appreciated. Despite being redefined as decision‐making or consensus politics, it still ignores the nationally minded realities of Swiss political culture and its new problems. Instead of consociationalism eliminating political divisions in Switzerland new environmental issues and forces emerged from the 1970s. These now constitute a new element in Swiss politics at odds with the prevailing political culture. Yet they are also influenced by this and further growth depends on its adaptability.     

Investigating Sub-groups of Harassers: The Roles of Attachment,Dependency, Jealousy and Aggression

The study aimed to classify non-harassers, minor, and severe harassers based on responses to measures of jealousy, dependency, attachment, perpetration, and victimization of relationship aggression, and harassment victimization, in a convenience sample of undergraduate students. Respondents (n = 177) replied on the following scales: Unwanted Pursuit Behaviors Inventory (UPBI: Langhinrichsen-Rohling et al., Violence and Victims 15:73–89, 2000), Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS: Straus, Journal of Marriage and the Family 41:75–88, 1979, measuring physical and verbal aggression for respondents and their partners), Sexual Jealousy Scale (SJS: Nannini and Meyers, The Journal of Sex Research 37:117–122, 2000), Interpersonal Dependency Inventory (IDI: Hirschfeld et al., Journal of Personality Assessment 41:610–618, 1997), and the Relationship Questionnaire (RQ: Bartholomew and Horowitz, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 61:226–244, 1991, measuring adult attachment). Discriminant Function Analysis (DFA), with responses to these measures entered as predictors, produced significant differences between the groups in the univariate results on measures of: preoccupied attachment, jealousy, emotional reliance, verbal aggression and harassment victimization, and physical aggression perpetration. The functions identified by the DFA correctly classified 61% of cases, and identified the important roles of jealousy, dependency, attachment, and relationship aggression in harassment. Differing responses to the measurement of these can theoretically distinguish between non-, minor, and severe harassers.     

Does Controlling Behavior Predict Physical Aggression and Violence to Partners?

Using data obtained from women’s shelter residents, male and female students, and male prisoners, this study investigated the association between non-violent controlling behaviors, physical aggression, and violence towards a spouse (N = 264). It was predicted that only men and women involved in intimate terrorism (Johnson, Violence Against Women, 11(12):1003–1018, 2006) would use controlling aggression, and that physical aggression used by those involved in situational couple violence would be unrelated to controlling behavior. Contrary to predictions derived from Johnson’s theory, regression analysis showed that control accounted significant proportions of the variance in the use of physical aggression for all three relationship categories. Some support was provided, however, as it was found that the pattern of both interrelationships of the five types of controlling behaviors, and control and physical aggression, supported Johnson’s distinction.