Adolescent Boys and Body Image: Weight and Muscularity Concerns as Dual Pathways to Body Dissatisfaction

This research evaluated a dual pathway model for body dissatisfaction among adolescent boys. The study provides empirical support for the importance of distinguishing between weight and muscularity concerns in understanding male body image. A total of 128 boys from grades 8 and 11 completed a self-report questionnaire. Results indicated that weight and muscularity concerns each made unique contributions to body dissatisfaction and were associated with distinct individual and peer context characteristics. Weight concern was associated with elevated BMI and more frequent appearance conversations with friends. Muscularity concern was significantly greater among boys who reported more frequent muscle-building conversations, had lower BMI, and were older. The results support the importance of distinguishing between and assessing both muscularity and weight concerns in the development of body image dissatisfaction among adolescent boys.     

Evidence of Atrocities or Atrocious Use of Evidence: The Controversial Use of Atrocity Film at Nuremberg

This article focuses upon the utilisation of film evidence in criminal proceedings. It describes and evaluates the historical deployment of this type of material at War Crimes Trials, with particular emphasis upon the International Military Tribunal established at Nuremberg, in 1945, in the wake of the Second World War. During this Trial, the prosecution placed reliance upon the film, Nazi Concentration Camps, depicting with graphic realism the horrific barbarism of the Nazi regime. However, this was only made possible by the implementation of innovatory evidential procedures, effectively circumventing the hearsay rule. A comparison is drawn between this, and the current position in England and Wales, following the recent relaxation of the traditional embargo upon hearsay evidence. However, film evidence of the type adduced at Nuremberg may be more prejudicial than probative and should such circumstances arise, the interests of justice may not truly be served. Susan Twist is Senior Lecturer in Law at the Lancashire Law School, University of Central Lancashire. smtwist@uclan.ac.uk. The author was assisted in research for this article by the dissertation of Kellie Goggins.     

Family Representative Payeeship and Violence Risk in Severe Mental Illness

Although representative payeeship is prevalent among people with mental illness and shows promise to positively influence clinically relevant outcomes, research also suggests this legal mechanism could be implemented in ways that are problematic. The current study examined whether family representative payeeship was associated with elevated risk of family violence perpetrated by persons with severe mental illness (SMI). Data were collected every 4 months for 1 year in structured interviews with N = 245 persons with SMI who received disability benefits. Multivariate analyses showed that substance abuse, history of violence, frequency of family contact, and family representative payeeship were associated with elevated odds of family violence. Analyses also showed family contact and family representative payeeship had a cumulative effect on increasing the predicted probability of family violence (controlling for covariates such as violence history and substance abuse). The data shed light on the potential for family representative payeeship to be associated with increased risk of interpersonal conflict and violence in SMI.     

Conduct and its Consequences: Attempts at Debiasing Jury Judgments

Jurors in negligence cases are supposed to judge a defendant by the reasonableness of his or her conduct and not by the consequences of that conduct. But several studies have shown that a cognitive heuristic known as hindsight bias can skew post hoc judgments of some prior behavior. Thus, jurors who must evaluate the actions of a defendant may be influenced inappropriately by the consequences of those actions. A complementary problem arises when jurors must evaluate the injuries incurred by the plaintiff. Here, jurors' knowledge about the defendant's allegedly negligent conduct can proactively influence their assessment of the plaintiff's injuries and determination of damages. The purpose of the present study was to examine the effectiveness of two procedural techniques intended to reduce or eliminate the impact of hindsight bias in negligence cases—multiple admonitions from a judge about the proper use of evidence—and bifurcation (actually withholding irrelevant evidence from jurors). We presented a re-enacted automobile negligence trial to 355 jury-eligible adults drawn from the community, varied the evidence and instructions that they heard, and measured liability judgments and damage awards from individual jurors both before and after deliberating, and from juries. Results showed that admonitions were generally ineffective in guiding jurors to the proper use of evidence but that bifurcation was relatively more effective. Deliberations had no curative effect on jurors' misapplication of evidence.