Facts,Preferences, and Doctrine: An Empirical Analysis of Proportionality Judgment

Legal proportionality is one of the most important principles for adjudicating among conflicting values. However, rather little is known about the factors that play a role in the formation of proportionality judgments. This research presents the first empirical analysis in this regard, relying on a sample of 331 legal experts (lawyers and legal academics). The policy domain addressed by the experiment is the antiterrorist military practice of targeted killings, which has been the subject of a legal debate. Our experimental findings suggest that proportionality judgments are receptive to normatively relevant facts. We also find strong correlational evidence for the effect of ideological preferences on such judgments. These results are consistent for two proportionality doctrines. We suggest that proportionality judgment is anchored jointly in the experts’ policy preferences and the facts of the case. We outline the implications of the findings for the psychological and legal literature.     

Is It the What or the How? The Roles of High‐Policing Tactics and Procedural Justice in Predicting Perceptions of Hostile Treatment: The Case of Security Checks at Ben‐Gurion Airport,Israel

What affects perceptions of hostile treatment by police, characterized by feelings such as humiliation and intimidation? Is it what the police do to the citizen, or is it about how they do it? The important effects of procedural justice are well documented in the policing literature. Yet, it is not clear how high‐policing tactics, coupled with procedural justice, affect one's sense of hostile treatment: is it the case that what the police do does not matter as long as they follow the principles of procedural justice, or do some invasive or unpleasant tactics produce negative emotions regardless of the amount of procedural justice displayed by the officer? In the present study we examine this question in the context of security checks at Ben‐Gurion Airport, Israel. Using a survey of 1,970 passengers, we find that the behavioral elements of procedural justice are an important antidote, mitigating the negative effects of four “extra” screening measures on the perceived hostility of the checks. At the same time, two security measures retain an independent and significant effect. We discuss the implications of our findings and hypothesize about the characteristics of policing practices that are less sensitive to procedural justice.     

Convenient and Inconvenient Truths in Family Law: Preventing Scholar‐Advocacy Bias in the Use of Social Science Research for Public Policy

This is the second of two articles on the risks of advocacy bias in the reporting of research findings when boundaries are blurred between social science research and advocacy in the pursuit of public policy. In the first article we identify common ways in which social science researchers and reviewers of research—wittingly or unwittingly—can become advocates for ideological positions and social policies at the expense of being balanced reporters of research evidence. The first article discusses the difference between truth in social science and truth in law and identifies a range of scholar‐advocacy strategies that bias research evidence, illustrated by recent debates about overnight parenting of infants and toddlers. In this second article we show how biased research evidence by scholar advocates results in increased confusion and controversy that diminishes the credibility of all parties and stalemates progress in the field, using a case illustration of intimate partner violence in family court. We also show how adherence to scientific methods prevents the misuse of research and suggest a number of collaborative, integrative measures that can help transcend the adversarial stalemate. In a look to the future we consider some unbiased, standardized ways of assessing the strength and generalizability of research evidence.     

Anti-immigrant parties in Europe: Ideological or protest vote?

Abstract. In this article we address the question whether or not the votes for anti–immigrant parties can be considered as protest votes. We define protest votes by the motives underlying electoral choices, building on earlier research done by Tillie (1995) and Van der Eijk & Franklin (1996). That research showed that ideological proximity and party size are the best predictors of party preference. On this basis we designed a typology of motives for party choice and how these motives would manifest themselves empirically. Analyzing the 1994 elections for the European Parliament for seven political systems we show that anti–immigrant parties attract no more protest votes than other parties do, with only one exception: the Dutch Centrumdemocraten. Voting for anti–immigrant parties is largely motivated by ideological and pragmatic considerations, just like voting for other parties. In addition, (negative) attitudes towards immigrants have a stronger effect on preferences for anti–immigrant parties than on preference for other parties. Social cleavages and attitudes towards European unification are of minor importance as determinants of preferences for anti–immigrant parties. The overall conclusion is that a rational choice model of electoral behavior has strong explanatory power for party preferences in general, but also for the support for anti–immigrant parties in particular.     

L'affaire Groupaction: un cas de politisation de la Fonction publique fédérale?

Sommaire: l affaire Groupaction met en relief deux formes de politisation de la Fonction publique fédérale: l'une partisane, l'autre structurelle. La politisation de type partisan et I'intégration de personnel politique au sein de la Fonction publique via l'article 39 de laLoi sur la Fonction publique sont devenues des phénoménes plus répandus au cours des demiéres années. La notion de politisation structurelle sou‐ligne comment la Fonction publique canadienne n'est pas politiquement neutre face à ceux et celles qui veulent dé‐faire l'ordre fédéral. Même si elle ne constitue pas une excuse justifiant le type de comportement observé dans l'affaire Groupaction, la politisation structurelle founit le contexte pour comprendre pourquoi certains fonc‐tionnaires ont pené qu'il pouvait être légitime de contourner les régles pour préServer I'unité nationale. Abstract: The Groupadion affair draws attention to two forms of politicization in the federal public service, one partisan and the other structural. Partisan politicization and the integration of political staff within the public service through Sedion 39 ofThe Public Service Employment Act have become more common in recent years. The concept of structural politicization underlines how the Canadian public service is not politically neutral in the face of those wishing to undo the federal order. While it does not constitute an excuse that could justify the type of behaviour observed in the Groupaction affair, structural politicization provides a context for understanding why some public servants thought it could be legitimate to circumvent the rules in order to preserve national unity. L'auteur remercie son assistant de recherche, Michael Dumoulin, pour son efficacité et son esprit de détective.Il remercie également Leslie A. Pal, Herman Bakvis et André J. Béanger pour leurs commentaires sur la premiére version de ce texte présenté au congrés annuel de I'Association canadienne de science politique à Halifax en mai 2003. Il remercie enfin Madame Jocelyne Bourgon et les évaluateurs anonymes de la Revue. L'auteur se dit seul responsable de I'interprétation donnée aux événements entourant cette affaire, qui faisait toujours I'objet d'enquêtes policiéres au moment de la révision finale de cet article. … les hauts fonctionnaires chargéS de la gestion des contrats ont manifesté un mépris flagrant à I'égard de la Loi…ils ont contourné b peu prés toutes les règles. Sheila Fraser, Vérificatrice généraie du Canada     

Watching the World: Seeing,Feeling—Understanding?

Books reviewed in this article:
Luc Boltanski, Distant Suffering: Morality, Media and Politics
Department for International Development, Viewing the World: A Study of British Television Coverage of Developing Countries     

International Patent Strategies of Small and Large Firms: An Empirical Study of Nanotechnology

The aim of this article is to investigate to what extent small‐firm foreign patents differ from those of their larger counterparts. The research setting consists of the population of U.S.‐owned small and large businesses with patent applications at the World International Patent Organization during 1996–2006 in the emerging field of nanotechnology. Findings reveal a significant and growing contribution of small firms to the globalization of patents. The analysis also suggests that small‐firm patents tend to be more novel and embedded in domestic innovation networks than large‐firm patents. Policy implications are multiple, including putting international patenting on the policy agenda and helping highly innovative small companies to explore foreign commercial opportunities in new markets of capital and technology.