How parties and interest groups protect their ties: The case of lobbying laws

Scholars have recently shown renewed interest in the study of party-interest group ties. According to previous studies, traditional ties between parties and organized interest are a matter of the past. Globalization, deindustrialization, and neoliberalism have posed serious challenges to their survival. Recent contributions suggest that, while these ties are indeed weaker than before, they have not disappeared. How do parties and groups protect their ties? This paper attempts to provide a partial, though often neglected, answer: their relationship survives when both actors work together to protect it. While previous literature identified regulatory policies, such as ethics and transparency regulations, as detrimental to party-group ties, their introduction is erroneously treated as independent from these ties. Through a comparative case study of the introduction of lobbying laws in Austria, Australia, and Ireland, this paper suggests that parties and groups shape the content of lobbying regulations in such a way to protect their relationship.     

A Better “Best Interests”: Immigration Policy in a Comparative Context

This conceptual article examines the role and limitations of the best interests standard in international and domestic policy, with a particular focus on how the standard is implicated in the treatment of unaccompanied minors in the United States. Motivated by emergent interdisciplinary scholarship on global youth and informed by a comparative consideration of best interests across other professions, we propose a new model of best interests. This model calls for a multidimensional recognition of youths’ family‐, community‐ and decision‐making contexts; acknowledgment of youths’ rights; and a commitment to speaking with, rather than for, young people. What results is a novel and dynamic understanding of best interests with relevance to scholars, practitioners, and policymakers.     

Economic Power Foundations of Cities in Global Governance

This study provides evidence that city government participation in global governance networks is explicable by the larger power hierarchy of cities in the global economy. Extant research on city government participation in global governance networks, or “transnational municipal networks (TMNs)” such as United Cities Local Governments, has largely ignored the relevance of research showing city-level connectivity to corporate and other economic networks among world cities. In this latter tradition of research, the level of a city’s connectivity to such economic networks is understood as commensurate with the hierarchical power it holds in the global economy. Using a sample of UK and Chinese cities, this study shows that patterns of participation in a range of TMNs are explained by varied measures of city-level connectivity to economic networks. Interpreted through structuration theory, findings suggest that city participation in global governance is shaped and stratified by city-level hierarchical power within the global economy.     

Attachment Models in Incarcerated Sex Offenders: A Preliminary Italian Study Using the Adult Attachment Interview

A group of sex offenders (clinical group: n = 19) was compared to a nonclinical sample matched by age, years of education, and gender (control group A: n = 19) to verify a higher incidence of insecure attachment models among sex offenders. In addition, we tested whether sex offenders were characterized by specific childhood experiences, compared to control adults (control group B: n = 19) with the same secure/insecure attachment classification. Results showed significant differences between offenders and control adults on both the AAI continuous score and the distribution of the two-way attachment classifications. Furthermore, sex offenders reported more intense experiences of rejection by the father figure and abuse in the family context during early childhood compared to not offenders subjects with the same attachment classification.     

An alternative method of capital jury selection

The purpose of this research was to develop and evaluate an alternative method of capital jury selection. Subjects who were classified as excludable and nonexcludable from capital jury service were exposed to a crime questionnaire which contained 16 brutal crimes. Sixty-five percent of the excludables indicated that they would consider imposing the death penalty in one or more scenarios, with 76% maintaining the new position 48 hours later. Furthermore, the rehabilitated excludables were significantly more tolerant of ambiguity and more due process oriented than the nonexcludables. A second study showed that the crime questionnaire did produce a small amount of bias against the defendants in terms of conviction rates and penalties. The advantages of the alternative system for providing a more objective, standardized questioning procedure and a more representative, less attitudinally biased jury are discussed.     

The effects of impeachment evidence and limiting instructions on individual and group decision making

Two studies were conducted to investigate the effects of impeachment evidence in civil cases. According to the Federal Rules of Evidence, impeachment evidence can be used to judge defendant credibility, but not to infer bad character or harmful propensity. Jury-eligible subjects watched a realistic videotaped trial in which prior convictions for perjury and character evidence of honesty or dishonesty were manipulated. In Study 1, subjects provided individual judgments, and in Study 2, subjects engaged in group deliberations. Impeachment evidence did not strongly affect verdicts, and character evidence of honesty decreased liability only when limiting instructions were given. In both studies, however, the evidence produced legally permissible and impermissible inferences. Prior convictions reduced perceived credibility and increased inferences of negligent propensity. Evidence of dishonesty produced lower credibility ratings and negative character impressions. Credibility, character, and propensity assessments were all important in the verdict-reaching process, suggesting that juror's decisions do not conform to the requirements of the Rules of Evidence.This research was supported by National Science Foundation under grant no. SES-8411599 awarded to the first author. We would like to thank Richard Lempert for his helpful comments on an earlier draft, and Jerry Busmeyer, Maureen Crowley, Myrna Gaidos, David Hullinger, Randy Larsen, Bill Little, Charles Nelson, Richard Schweickert, Harold Seymour, and Al Solomon for serving as witnesses in the trial videotapes.