Human Capital and Administrative Burden: The Role of Cognitive Resources in Citizen-State Interactions

One means by which the state reinforces inequality is by imposing administrative burdens that loom larger for citizens with lower levels of human capital. Integrating insights from various disciplines, this article focuses on one aspect of human capital: cognitive resources. The authors outline a model that explains how burdens and cognitive resources, especially executive functioning, interrelate. The article then presents illustrative examples, highlighting three common life factors—scarcity, health problems, and age-related cognitive decline. These factors create a human capital catch-22, increasing people's likelihood of needing state assistance while simultaneously undermining the cognitive resources required to negotiate the burdens they encounter while seeking such assistance. The result is to reduce access to state benefits and increase inequality. The article concludes by calling for scholars of behavioral public administration and public administration more generally to incorporate more attention to human capital into their research.     

States Divided: The Implications of American Federalism for COVID-19

The explosion of the coronavirus onto the global stage has posed unprecedented challenges for governance. In the United States, the question of how best to respond to these challenges has fractured along intergovernmental lines. The federal government left most of the decisions to the states, and the states went in very different directions. Some of those decisions naturally flowed from the disease's emerging patterns. But to a surprising degree, there were systematic variations in the governors’ decisions, and these variations were embedded in a subtle but growing pattern of differences among the states in a host of policy areas, ranging from decisions about embracing the Affordable Care Act to improving their infrastructure. These patterns raise fundamental questions about the role of the federal government's leadership in an issue that was truly national in scope, and whether such varied state reactions were in the public interest. The debate reinforces the emerging reality of an increasingly divided states of America.     

Construct Validity of Adolescent Antisocial Personality Disorder

This study examined the construct validity of antisocial personality disorder (ASPD) diagnosed in adolescence. Boys and girls were grouped by history of DSM-III-R conduct disorder (CD) and ASPD: Controls (n=340) had neither diagnosis; CD Only (n=77) had CD by age 17 but no ASPD through age 20; Adolescent ASPD (n = 64) had ASPD by age 17. The Adolescent ASPD group was then compared to 20 young adult men who met criteria for ASPD (ASPD group). As expected, the Adolescent ASPD group had significantly more depression and substance use disorders, a greater performance>verbal IQ discrepancy, more deviant peers, and poorer academic functioning than the CD Only group and Controls. The Adolescent ASPD and ASPD groups did not differ on most variables. Results support the construct validity of Adolescent ASPD and suggest that such a diagnosis could help identify adolescents at risk for persistent antisocial behavior. Jeanette Taylor is an Assistant Professor at Florida State University. She received her Ph.D. in 1999 from the University of Minnesota. Her research examines biological, cognitive, and environmental influences on personality disorders and substance use disorders. Irene J. Elkins is a Co-investigator at the Minnesota Center for Twin and Family Research. She received her Ph.D. in 1993 from the University of Kansas and is a member of the Society for Research on Psychopathology. Her major research interests include the relationship of personality, ADHD, and antisocial behavior to substance abuse, as well as gene-environment interrelationships. Lisa Legrand is a Research Associate with the Minnesota Center for Twin and Family Research at the University of Minnesota. She received her Ph.D. in 2003 from the University of Minnesota. Her major research interests include gene-environment interplay in the development of externalizing psychopathology. Dawn Peuschold is a Senior Clinical Forensic Psychologist at the Hennepin Country District Court and an instructor at the University of Minnesota. She completed a post-doctoral fellowship in forensic psychology at the University of Massachusetts Medical School after receiving her Ph.D. in clinical psychology from the University of Minnesota. She is interested in risk factors for reoffense in juveniles. William G. Iacono is a Distinguished McKnight University Professor at the University of Minnesota, the institution from which he received his Ph.D. in psychology. He conducts longitudinal studies of adolescent twins and adoptees aimed at understanding the development of adult adjustment and mental health.     

Does Familiarity Breed Contempt? The Impact of Information on Mass Attitudes toward Congress

Two features of citizen response to Congress can be taken as grounds for concern. First, Americans know relatively little about Congress, and especially about congressional procedures and policy output. Second, Congress typically emerges as the least respected political institution. Although these matters are troubling when viewed individually, more disturbing is the dilemma posed when knowledge and attitudes toward Congress are viewed in tandem. It appears that citizens who know Congress the best like Congress the least. Consequently, a sophisticated polity and a well-respected legislature seem fundamentally incompatible. This article seeks to resolve this dilemma, contending that there is nothing about knowledge per se that leads citizens to view Congress unfavorably. Rather, differences in knowledge levels alter the considerations citizens bring to bear when evaluating Congress, with the best-informed individuals constructing judgments on the basis of the most relevant Congress-specific criteria while less knowledgeable citizens employ readily available but more peripheral criteria.     

The impact of child SSI enrollment on household outcomes

We use data from the Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP) to investigate the impact that child Supplemental Security Income (SSI) enrollment has on household outcomes, including poverty, household earnings, and health insurance coverage. The longitudinal nature of the SIPP allows us to control for unobserved, time‐invariant differences across households by measuring outcomes in the same household in the months leading up to and immediately following the first reporting of child SSI income. Our regression analyses demonstrate that for every $100 increase in household SSI income, total household income increases by roughly $72, reflecting some modest offset of other transfer income and conditional household earnings. Our analyses further demonstrate that child SSI enrollment is associated with a statistically significant and persistent reduction in the probability that a child lives in poverty of roughly 11 percentage points. Additional analyses suggest that program enrollment has virtually no impact on health insurance coverage because most new SSI recipients have health insurance from Medicaid or another source at the time of enrollment. © 2007 by the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management     

Kyoto Protocol cooperation: Does government corruption facilitate environmental lobbying?

Does environmental lobbying affect the probability of environmental treaty ratification? Does the level of government corruption play a role for the success of such lobbying? In this paper, we propose that a more corruptible government may be more responsive to the demands of the environmental lobby. We use several stratified hazard models and panel data from 170 countries on the timing of Kyoto Protocol ratification to test this hypothesis. We find that increased environmental lobby group activity raises the probability of ratification, and the effect rises with the degree of corruption.