Age Differences in Lineup Identification Accuracy: People Are Better with Their Own Age

Previous research has reported that young adults are better at eyewitness face recognition than are older adults. However, these studies have used young adults as culprits and fillers. We explore how the relative ages of the witness and the culprit influence eyewitness accuracy in 2 experiments. In the first experiment, young (18–25 years old) and older (35–55 years old) adults each saw 4 crime videos. In 2 the culprit was a young adult and in 2 the culprit was an older adult. Participants were more accurate at identifying the culprit when viewing culprit present lineups comprising people of their own age: an own age bias analogous to the own race bias. In the 2nd experiment, using a similar procedure, young (18–33 years old) and older (40–55 years old) adults viewed both culprit present and culprit absent lineups. The results of the first experiment were replicated for the culprit present lineups. However, no own age bias was found for the culprit absent lineups. Implications for police procedures dealing with cross-generation identifications are discussed.     

Attention as a Valuable Resource

Keeping up with the news and monitoring public affairs are typically considered civic obligations. Yet there is a great deal of competition for people’s limited attention. Some studies explore when people tune in to the news and what sorts of public affairs content attract our time, but these topics warrant more research. Scholars concerned with the news media’s political role must better understand what leads people to the news in the first place. The practical import of this work is pronounced in an era where news organizations struggle to make ends meet. The purpose of this essay is to categorize what we know about what motivates people to tune in to news and then to propose a research agenda for analyzing attention to public affairs content.     

The Implications of Endemic Corruption for State Legitimacy in Developing Nations: an Empirical Exploration of the Nigerian Case

There is an extensive literature on the ramifications of corruption for economic growth, as well as for democracy. Largely unexplored, however, is how corruption works to lessen government legitimacy and empower violent anti-state movements. In this article, the perception of corruption in Nigeria is considered. Noting that Nigeria must suppress the violent extremist group Boko Haram in order to continue to govern the nation, the connections between Nigerian perceptions of corruption and support for the movement are treated. Until this research, however, there existed no empirical evaluation of this relationship. Using analysis of a survey of over 10,000 Nigerians accomplished in 2012 and 2013, we show that issues of state illegitimacy and endemic corruption have contributed to Nigeria’s present security crisis by fomenting support for non-state violent actors.     

Gender Justice or Gendered Justice? Female Defendants in International Criminal Tribunals

Recent scholarship has given increasing attention to studying women’s involvement in conflict and mass violence. However, there is comparatively less discussion of the experiences of women as actors and perpetrators in conflict, and limited discussion of women as defendants in international criminal tribunals. This article explores this under-researched area. By analysing legal materials from the cases of six female defendants, this article investigates the extent to which legal discourses are shaped by stereotypes regarding femininity, conflict and peace. It identifies three gender narratives—mothers, monsters and wives—used in relation to female defendants, which highlight the incompatibility of femininity with violence, and deny women’s agency in political and military contexts. Thus, this article concludes that female defendants in international criminal tribunals are viewed through gendered lenses, and discussed in accordance with gendered themes. This gendered justice is problematic, as it reinforces patriarchal gender stereotypes, and may hinder attempts to facilitate gender justice.     

Religiosity and Rebellion in Nigeria: Considering Boko Haram in the Radical Tradition

Testing social movement theory positing that radical organizations are ideologically driven at their core, but are supported by civilians who are driven by social factors, this research interrogates the disparity between radical group ideology and supporter belief set in the context of present-day Nigeria. Content analysis of randomly selected Boko Haram publications establishes the high, and increasing, levels of religiosity exhibited by the violent social movement itself. In contrast, a large-N survey of Nigerians conducted in 2012 and 2013 shows that high levels of religiosity do not significantly predict willingness to justify violence, commitment to non-state violent actors, or positive attitude toward Boko Haram among Nigerians as a whole, but rather the opposite. Given these findings, Boko Haram may be better understood within the tradition of radical extremist movements across the ideological spectrum, even while it frames its struggle as that of a distinctly religious movement.     

The ‘heart’ of Eurasia? Kazakhstan's centrally located capital city

In a world still dominated by a geopolitical system of territorial states, one tool in the state- and nation-building repertoire is the strategy of moving a capital from one city to another, and to an ostensibly more ‘central’ location of a geometrically conceived territory. From Ankara to Brasília, the technique has been used in a variety of places around the world, and Kazakhstan's new capital since 1997, Astana, is one more recent iteration. Taking a Foucauldian approach to analysing political technologies of government, the author examines the strategy of the centrally located city and considers how it has been instrumental to simultaneously producing a ‘state effect’ and a ‘territory effect’ in newly independent Kazakhstan. Part of a larger mixed-methods study, this article draws on a diverse range of methods, including data from interviews, participant observation, textual analysis, focus groups and a country-wide survey.     

State Sovereignty and Private Military and Security Companies in Australia

Private Military and Security Companies (PMSCs) as active participants within global security environments has increased in the last two decades exponentially. States have progressively incorporated PMSCs in their security functions, both domestically and internationally. Since the conflict in Iraq in the early 2000s, there have been numerous plausible reports of PMSCs violating international humanitarian law. Despite this, only a few have ever been prosecuted, suggesting a fundamental challenge to understandings regarding state control and monopoly over violence. Utilising a historical case study of an Australian PMSC in Operation Iraqi Freedom, this article argues that PMSCs undermine Australian sovereign legitimacy. It demonstrates how Australian oversight and accountability regarding its use of PMSCs is significantly fractured and current regulatory mechanisms concerning PMSCs are deficient. Thus, the Australian government's ability to provide control over the actions of PMSCs is diminished, affecting its sovereign legitimacy and ability to monopolise violence. The article overall conveys the dubious position states come into when the use-of-force is wielded by actors for distinct material incentives.     

Patient narrative: an ‘on-switch’ for evaluating best interests

This article examines how the wishes, feelings, values and beliefs of adults lacking capacity can be evaluated and the extent to which they are given effect in best interests decision-making. One way of fulfilling the clinician’s legal responsibilities to take a patient’s preferences into account is to explicitly link these to the notion of narrative. Narratives provide a compelling grounding and give weight to views and values that may have been informally and consistently expressed in the past. An evaluation of recent case law suggests that the trajectory of a person’s life, their character and personality, and the perspectives of those with whom the patient has valued relationships are given increasing judicial recognition. Attending to the narrative of the patient could lead to a more sophisticated judgement of best interests than an objective ‘balance sheet’ approach would allow and enable greater alignment with the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.     

The Scientific and the Social in Implementing Atkins v. Virginia

Atkins v. Virginia (2002) categorically exempts intellectually disabled defendants from execution, yet some constitutionally suspect punishments suggest a gap between law and practice. This article moves beyond critiquing Atkins’ formal implementation to provide a decentered analysis of the Atkins gap focused on the category of intellectual disability. It explores how drawing boundaries around intellectual disability in capital cases requires law to grapple with fluid scientific and social constructs through a study of how courts operationalize intellectual disability in capital cases. It draws from literatures considering the construction of intellectual disability and law's relationship to the scientific and the social and finds that this intersection first enables a conceptual disconnect between scientific and legal constructions of intellectual disability and, second, invites the use of stereotypes to inform the category. These processes undermine Atkins’—and other categorical exemptions’—ability to functionally limit extreme punishments and also reveal law as mutually constitutive.