A Simple Multivariate Test for Asymmetric Hypotheses

Michael J. Gilligan Department of Politics, New York University, 7th Floor, 726 Broadway, New York, NY 10003 Matt Golder Department of Political Science, Florida State University, 531 Bellamy Building, Tallahassee, FL 32306-2230 e-mail: wrclark{at}umich.edu (corresponding author) e-mail: michael.gilligan{at}nyu.edu e-mail: mgolder{at}fsu.edu In this paper, we argue that claims of necessity and sufficiencyinvolve a type of asymmetric causal claim that is useful inmany social scientific contexts. Contrary to some qualitativeresearchers, we maintain that there is nothing about such asymmetriesthat should lead scholars to depart from standard social sciencepractice. We take as given that deterministic and monocausaltests are inappropriate in the social world and demonstratethat standard multiplicative interaction models are up to thetask of handling asymmetric causal claims in a multivariate,probabilistic manner. We illustrate our argument with examplesfrom the empirical literature linking electoral institutionsand party system size.     

Designed to fail: Self-control and involvement in the criminal justice system

This study investigates self-control theory using official and selfreported criminal records of 500 adult offenders. Four items derived from rapsheets (aliases, date of birth, place of birth, and social security number) are used as indicators of the self-control construct. Negative binomial regression models indicate a significant inverse relationship between self-control and escape arrests, failure to appear violations, probation and parole violations, felony convictions, and prison sentences. Since system involvement entails discipline, tenacity, and responsibility, offenders with low self-control are more likely to experience a criminal justice system failure.     

Growing Without Pains? Explaining Liberal Democrat MPs' Behaviour

Recent academic studies and wider commentary on the behaviour of Liberal Democrat MPs have recognised their relatively high level of cohesiveness on whipped votes when compared to that of Labour and the Conservatives, and to the Liberal Democrats' own reputation; but while this trend continues, few studies have focused upon its causes. This article uses the MPs' voting records, personal papers, interviews and wider contextual data to chart the extent of that unity over time, and to explore its origins, including group composition, structure, patronage, relations with the extra-parliamentary party and other parties as well as national party image. It finds the key to this unity in a combination of medium and long-term features of the Liberal and Liberal Democrat group of MPs, rather than a short-term singular determinant.     

Popular perceptions of political regimes in East and Southeast Asia

Political regimes in East and Southeast Asia run the full spectrum from liberal democracy through various hybrid democratic-authoritarian types and on to full-blown authoritarianism and totalitarianism. While political scientists have invested much effort and ingenuity in creating typologies of regimes to better understand the empirical diversity of political structures and processes, much less attention has been paid to what the citizens think. How do people in East and Southeast Asian countries perceive their own institutions and performance of governance? This article uses public opinion data derived from the AsiaBarometer 2006 and 2007 Surveys of 12 East and Southeast Asian countries to map what citizens actually think about their structures, processes, and outcomes of governance and compare these with the regime classifications of political scientists. The results revealed universal commitment to elections but disillusionment with political practice, positive estimations of the institutions of governance in Southeast Asia but much less enthusiasm in East Asia, and a preference for moderate opinions. There is no clear overall correlation between regime type and popular perception.