Examining the research underlying the sentencing guidelines concept in Denver,Colorado: A partial replication of a reform effort

This paper examines the empirical basis for the criminal sentencing guidelines developed in Denver, Colorado. Unlike many other sentencing reforms, such guidelines have generally been developed out of an empirical analysis of past sentencing decisions, which identifies those variables most predictive of sentence. Empirical arguments, as a part of a reform effort, are often more persuasive than nonempirical arguments. However, when the analysis is inadequate or faulty, the resultant reform effort may be called into question.Presented in this paper is a reanalysis of the original data used to develop the Denver guidelines. Questions are raised regarding implications of extensive missing observations across cases and the resulting shrinkage of cases available for multivariate analyses. The original data is reanalyzed in both its original form and in a more complete form by estimating the missing data through a complex regression technique. Our analyses suggest that there are serious methodological weaknesses in the original study. The implications of these weaknesses are discussed.     

Converging NBIC Technologies for Improving Human Performance: A Critical Assessment of the Novelty and the Prospects of the Project

This contribution focuses on two claims advanced by the proponents of the project of "Converging Technologies for Improving Human Performance." Firstly, it is maintained that this project represents something genuinely new and quite unique. Secondly, it is argued that the future prospects of the project are extraordinarily positive. In order to critically assess both claims this paper first focuses on the question of whether there is actually anything genuinely new about the project of improving human performance by means of converging NBIC technologies. In addition it is analyzed whether the project warrants that we be optimistic about its future prospects.     

Reducing juvenile recidivism with cognitive training and a cell phone follow-up: an evaluation of the realvictory program

The purpose of this research was to evaluate the effects of a cognitive training and cell phone intervention on the recidivism of 70 juvenile offenders. Median days to rearrest were 106 for the control group, 191 for the class-only group, and 278 for the class plus cell phone group. Using rearrest as the survival criterion, the survival ratios of the class-only and class plus cell phone groups were 2.64 and 2.94 times longer than the control group, respectively. After controlling for gender, prior arrests, and risk score, the Poisson regression indicated that the class-only and class plus cell phone groups were 51% lower in total arrests than the control group. These results suggest that cognitive training supplemented with a cell phone coach is an effective and cost-efficient intervention for reducing recidivism.     

Communicating authoritarian elite cohesion

In this paper, we develop a theoretical framework to analyse the communicative imperatives authoritarian regimes face as a consequence of their self-inflicted opacities. The most important facts about the actors and factors that sustain authoritarian rule are unobservable. To demonstrate their power, authoritarian rulers have to render them visible. They have to dramatize their power and present on the front stage what they want people to know about the backstage of authoritarian politics. We conceptualize the communicative strategies of authoritarian rulers with a focus on the primary existential threats they face: the lateral threats that emanate from within the authoritarian elite. We illustrate dictators’ communicative repertoire with empirical material from communist Cuba from 2006 to 2011, during the critical juncture of leadership transition from Fidel Castro to his brother Raúl.     

Authority and Authorisation

The core of Kelsen's strong views onauthority emerging from his concept of law is this:Authority of law, authority in law andauthority about law are one and the same thing.The conceptual problems suggested by these threedifferent prepositions must and can be solved in onefell swoop. Kelsen's core view will first be probed bygiving an account of what is a promising approachoffered in a fairly early text, Das Problem derSouveränität, namely, what it means to`set' or `posit' the law. Inevitably, this leadsto an interpretation of the Grundnorm, one thatintends to accommodate as many Kelsenian emphases aspossible. The Grundnorm will be presented as ashield against hypostatising authority. From there,some characteristics will be inferred of the type ofauthority that arises from Kelsen's account of legalknowledge, which will be called, somewhat polemically,authority without an author.