Being Underway,Not in Delay,on Climate Change-Related Disclosure

Confusion among companies over what is adequate in environmental disclosure, in general, sets an unfortunate stage for contemplating the newer matter of climate change-related disclosure. Companies waiting for new legislative and regulatory outcomes before contending with climate change disclosure, however, are in exposed and inadvisable delay on the matter. Existing regulations and standards pertain and instruct, if indirectly, on what is to be disclosed and accrued, and when. Their requirements, the possibility of enforcement actions, and recent evidence of costly consequences to former executives from improper environmental financial disclosure reinforce corporate management's need for disclosure diligence, including on climate change. The future is here.     

Interwar Internationalism, the British Labour Party, and the Historiography of International Relations

This article questions two interrelated myths pertaining to the interwar internationalism of the British Labour Party and the theories of so-called idealists in the academic discipline of International Relations (IR). In IR, interwar "idealists" are (in)famous for a detached and utopian approach to international politics. Conventional historiographical verdicts on the international policy of the Labour Party in the interwar period suggest that the party was the practical mirror of this naïve international outlook. In fact, the two themes are connected, most notably through Labour's Advisory Committee on International Questions . This article brings the study of Labour's internationalism and the international theories of purported idealists together by focusing on debates on the League of Nations and the use of force. The analysis reveals that conventional historiographical narratives are inadequate and too simplistic for grasping the diversity of Labour's internationalism and interwar progressivist ideas about international politics in general.     

Experimental Methodology in Political Science

Experiments offer a useful methodological tool to examine issuesof importance to political scientists. The historical and culturaldifferences between experiments in behavioral economics andsocial psychology are discussed. Issues of central concern toexperimentalists are covered, including impact versus control,mundane versus experimental realism, internal versus externalvalidity, deception, and laboratory versus field experiments.Advantages and disadvantages of experimentation are summarized.     

Evaluating the Comprehensibility of Jury Instructions: A Method and an Example

Methodological problems in jury simulation research involve issues of sampling, choice of stimulus materials, appropriate unit of analysis, appropriate dependent variable, corroborative data, and problems of role playing. Despite these issues, comprehension of jury instructions may be suitable for examination by jury simulation techniques--if certain of these methodological concerns can be satisfied. In a series of 5 experiments using typical Canadian legal instructions on criminal conspiracy and the coconspirator exception to the hearsay rule, this study attempted to validate a simple and inexpensive technique for testing the incomprehensibility of a given set of jury instructions by requiring participants to apply those legal instructions to a set of facts. The results demonstrate the utility of an application test, and suggest that for assessing the comprehensibility of jury instructions, it may be acceptable to use undergraduate students as participants, to use individual participants without group deliberation, and to employ written stimulus materials.     

Blaming the jews

His most recent publication is Interminority Affairs in the U.S.: The Challenge of Pluralism,a special issue of The Annals of the American Academy of Social and Political Science.He is author of Mainstreams and Margins: Jews, Blacks, and Other Americans,published by Transaction.     

A Dutiful Voice: Justice in the Distribution of Jury Service

Jury service in the United States is both compulsory and yet distributed to some but not others in a nonsystematic way. Concerns about unfairness in this distribution system have led to legal changes; however, there is still little empirical information on how jurors view the jury selection process. This study considers jury selection in terms of participants' perceptions of procedural and distributive justice. I argue that justice in this setting is related to areas of conflict between the decision maker and the prospective jurors, especially over privacy protection, despite strong rhetoric that jurors minimize their own preferences and rights in this setting. Data from interviews of 194 formerly excused and selected jurors support this contention.