Ingredients of institutional reputations and citizen engagement with regulators

The purpose of this study is to examine the link between the reputational components of efficacy and moral reliability of institutions, and citizens' compliance with institutional recommendations. Research on bureaucratic reputations highlights the significance of positive political reputations based on credibility and legitimacy, but the impact of these components is not systematically isolated and studied. We draw insights from political psychology to move beyond a positive‐negative valence‐based approach of reputation, and highlight the different effect of efficacy and moral reliability components of reputation on citizens' cooperation, engagement in water saving activities, and levels of complaints. We use the Cypriot Water Authority as a case study and inquire how its institutional reputation influences Cypriot citizens' behavior regarding water use. Our data was collected via a representative national survey administered to a random sample of 800 Cypriots in the spring of 2009 and show that favorable perceptions of particular components of institutional reputation shape the levels of satisfaction with specific organizational outputs.     

Skin Lesions and Other Associated Findings in Children with Abusive Head Trauma

When Abusive Head Trauma (AHT) is suspected, the presence of extracranial lesions can be a decisive factor in confirming the diagnosis. In this article, we briefly review and illustrate some of the skin lesions and other extracranial injuries frequently associated with AHT.     

Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment

Estimates of the incidence of victim gun use from the National CrimeVictimization Survey (NCVS) are consistently lower than are those fromother studies. To examine the divergence, we conducted a survey that gaugedthe impact of methodological differences between the NCVS and the otherstudies. For half of the sample, we asked questions from the NCVS, followedby questions from the other surveys. For the other half of the sample, wepresented the questions in the reverse order. We examined two hypotheses:(1) survey methods account for the divergent results, and (2) the questionscover unrelated activities. The results provided some support for the firsthypothesis, but respondents also reported many more defenses to thequestions from the other surveys than to the NCVS questions. Consistent withthe second hypothesis, this suggests that the NCVS and the other surveysmeasure responses to largely different provocations.     

Juggling Inputs, Outputs, and Outcomes in the Search for Policy Competence: Recent Experience in Australia

During the mid- to late 1980s, the Labor government in Australia under Prime Minister Bob Hawke distinguished itself by achieving a balance in its budgeting and management approaches. This allowed for focusing on inputs, outputs, and outcomes in tandem. The approach differed considerably from that pursued in New Zealand. There, an overemphasis on outputs introduced serious distortions to the relations between ministers and officials, which reformers in Wellington have subsequently taken strides toward correcting.
As often happens with reform movements, the Australian process reached a plateau by the early to mid-1990s. Broadly, officials welcomed a change of government in 1996 with the expectation that the coalition under Prime Minister John Howard would give new impetus to innovative public management. Ironically, this coalition addressed the issues surrounding budgeting and management reform through an unreconstructed 1980s lens, highlighting outputs at the expense of balanced emphasis of inputs and outcomes as well. As suggested by the Labor government's success in the 1980s and the adjustments attempted by New Zealand governments in the 1990s, collective dynamics among and between members of cabinet and officials, respectively, are key to a balanced approach. These dynamics foster a sense of trusteeship whereby participants see that inputs, outputs, and outcomes form part of a seamless web centered on public interest. The analysis of the Coalition's performance so far suggests thhat its efforts at reform have proven retrogressive when evaluated by this standard.     

Electoral bias at the 2015 general election: reducing Labour’s electoral advantage

Electoral bias results in an asymmetrical seat distribution between parties with similar vote shares. Over recent British general elections Labour held an advantage because it efficiently converted votes into seats. Following the 2015 election result this advantage has reduced considerably, principally because Labour’s vote distribution saw it accumulate more ineffective votes, particularly where electoral support was not converted into seats. By contrast, the vote distribution of the Conservative party is now superior to that of Labour because it acquired fewer wasted votes although Labour retains a modest advantage overall because it benefits from inequalities in electorate size and differences in voter turnout. Features of the 2015 election, however, raise general methodological challenges for decomposing electoral bias. The analysis, therefore, considers the effect of substituting the Liberal Democrats as the third party with the United Kingdom Independence Party. It also examines the outcome in Scotland separately from that in England and Wales. Following this analysis it becomes clear that the method for decomposing electoral bias requires clearer guidelines for its application in specific settings.     

A method for measuring and decomposing electoral bias for the three-party case, illustrated by the British case

The measurement of bias in election results, whereby one or more parties are advantaged in the translation of votes into seats at the expense of others, is attracting increasing attention. So far, almost all of the analytical work – aimed at both identifying the extent of bias in an election result and establishing its causes – has focused on either two-party systems or on the largest two parties in multi-party systems. Building on the firm foundations of one such approach, this paper introduces an original procedure for analysing bias in three-party systems using a readily-appreciated metric for both evaluating the degree of bias and decomposing it into the various causal factors. This is illustrated using the example of the 2005 British general election and a comparison of the results from two-party and three-party analyses of six recent elections there.