Psychologists can help to reduce inappropriate aggressive behavior through careful screening of police officer candidates. The purpose of this study was to identify whether the IAT Reasoning Test (IAT), a measure of trait aggression, and a Monetary Delay Discounting Task (MDDT), a measure of behavioral control, could predict on-the-job police aggression better than the MMPI-2. We administered the MMPI-2, the IAT, and the MDDT to 85 police officers. Three prediction models were created using scores on the IAT and the MDDT, and scales from the MMPI-2. Model 1 included the IAT and the MDDT. Model 2 included MMPI-2 scales Hostility (HO), Overcontrolled Hostility (OH), and Anger (ANG). Model 3 included MMPI-2 scales Frequency (F), Hysteria (HY), and Psychopathic Deviate (PD). We found that Model 1 was the only predictor of supervisors?? ratings of on-the-job aggression, however, the predictive utility of this model was attributable primarily to the MDDT predictor. Based on these findings, we suggest that using measures of behavioral control during preemployment screening may help to identify potentially aggressive police officer candidates. 相似文献
Previous research suggests that positive and normative beliefs about economics are largely unrelated. Using questions from two national surveys, this study finds that: (a)?the underlying determinants of positive and normative beliefs are strikingly similar; (b)?education is by far the strongest overall determinant of both positive and normative beliefs; and (c) the variables known to push positive beliefs in the same direction as formal economic training—education, male gender, income growth, and job security—also push normative beliefs in the same direction. These results strongly suggest that the positive-normative connection has been underestimated. 相似文献
Survey research is a common tool for assessing public opinions, perceptions, attitudes, and behaviors for analyses in many social science disciplines. Yet there is little knowledge regarding how specific elements of survey research methodology are applied in practice in public administration. This article examines five mainstream public administration journals over an eight‐year period regarding current methodological practice, organized around the total survey error framework. The findings show that survey research in the field of public administration features mainly small‐scale studies, heavy reliance on a single data collection mode, questionable sample selection procedures, and suspect sample frame quality. Survey data largely are analyzed without careful consideration of assumptions or potential sources of error. An informed evaluation of the quality of survey data is made more difficult by the fact that many journal articles do not detail data collection procedures. This study concludes with suggestions for improving the quality and reporting of survey research in the field.相似文献
Authorities rely on reports from private citizens to detect and enforce more than a trivial portion of effective law-breaking. The present article is the first to study the cultural aspect of peer reporting experimentally. By collecting data in a post-Soviet country (Moldova), we focus in particular on how the Soviet legacy of using citizens as private informants may have a long-lasting effect on their willingness to cooperate with state authorities. We then contrast those effects with peer reporting behavior in France, a Western society. Our results suggest that participants in Moldova view cooperation with authorities as less socially acceptable than their counterparts in France. Our results also suggest that participants in Moldova engage less frequently in peer reporting than individuals in France. However, we also find that less peer reporting does not necessarily imply less tax compliance. Participants in both countries exhibit very similar tax compliance rates. We explain the effect of peer reporting on tax compliance in Moldova using the country's past experience during the Soviet era, when being reported to authorities was common and carried grave consequences.
We examine the evolution of Latin American cities in the last two decades of the twentieth century and in the first years
of the twenty-first on the basis of comparable data from six countries comprising over 80 percent of the region’s population.
These years correspond to the shift in hegemonic models of development in the region, from import-substitution industrialization
to neoliberal “open markets” adjustment. We examine how the application of the new policies correlates with change patterns
in four areas: urban systems and urban primacy; urban unemployment and informal employment; poverty and inequality; and crime,
victimization, and urban insecurity. We present detailed analyses of each of these topics based on the latest available data
for the six countries. We conclude that significant changes in patterns of urbanization have taken place in the region, reflecting,
in part, the expected and unexpected consequences of the application of the new model of development. Implications of our
findings for each of the four areas examined and for the future of the region are discussed.
Alejandro Portes is department chair and Howard Harrison and Gabrielle Snyder Beck Professor of sociology, and director of
the Center for Migration and Development at Princeton University. His current research focuses on the adaptation process of
second-generation immigrants and the rise of transnational immigrant communities in the United States.
Bryan R. Roberts is professor of sociology and C.B. Smith Chair in US-Mexico Relations at the University of Texas, Austin.
His most recent work explores issues of develorment, globalization, immigration, and social policy in Latin America.
Data on which this paper is based were collected by theLatin American Urbanization at the End of the Twentieth Century project, sponsored by the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation. We thank our collaborators and directors of country teams, without
whom this study would not have been possible: Marcele Cerruti and Alejandro Grimson in Argentina; Licia Valladares, Bianca
Freire-Medeiros, and Filippina Chinelli in Brazil; Guillermo, Wormald, Francisco Sabatini, Yasna Contreras and their collaborators
in Chile; Marina Ariza and Juan Manuel Ramirez in Mexico; Jaime Joseph and the Centro Alternativa research team in Peru; and
Ruben Kaztman, Fernando Filgueira, Alejandro Retamoso and their collaborators in Uruguay. We would also like to thank Carolina
Flores and Lissette Aliaga for their assistance in assembling and analyzing survey data-bases from the six countries. We also
thank anonymous referees of this journal for their comments. Responsibility for the contents is exclusively ours. 相似文献