Consistency in policy thinking

This study examines consistency in opinion on a variety of important state and national policy questions. The data come from a two-wave panel study of adult Floridians conducted in 1981 and 1982. Wide variations in consistency of opinion over the 1-year period are found. Salience has an important impact on consistency, with respondents who find an issue salient almost always exhibiting more consistent opinions, but salience cannot explain the variations in consistency across issues. The level of government on which the issue is focused (national or state) has no bearing on consistency. Most important, the particular nature of the issue itself, especially how central it is to the individual and how long it has occupied the political agenda (maturity), affects consistency of opinion. Centrality and maturity both contribute to issue attitude consistency and even can compensate for one another. Both highly central new issues and remote old issues can produce consistent attitudes, but deficiences in centrality seem to override issue maturity. These findings illustrate the value of looking beyond opinion distributions to the meaning of the survey response. With information on consistency and its sources, the public opinion analyst can interpret polling results intelligently, and the study of public opinion can become more objective and scientific.     

Federalism and Consociational Regimes

Federalism and consociationalism are useful means of understandingpolitical systems. Federalism and consociationalism are bothbased on compound majoritarianism rather than simple majoritarianism,and both represent modern attempts to accommodate democraticcomplexity and pluralism, but the two systems are not quitesymmetrical, and territorial organization is not the only characteristicthat differentiates them. Instead, it can be said that federalismrelates to the form of a polity, while consociationalism relatesto the character of a regime. To the extent that federalismmay also function as the character of a regime, then federalismand consociationalism may be more symmetrical. One of the ambiguitiesof federalism is that it is often both form and regime. Consociationalism,however, relates only to regime.     

Psychiatric screening of civil service candidates with particular reference to police applicants.

This prelimary report has reviewed the activities of a Medical Review Board for a Civil Service Commission. The responsibility of the Board is to review conflicting data in cases where the hiring authority has attempted to exclude a candidate, particularly a police candidate, on the grounds that the applicant is mentally unfit to perform the duties of the position. This rule has been applied primarily to police applicants, secondarily to fireman applicants, and rarely to other. Psychiatrists who participate must be aware of the underlying conflicts within civil service systems, the possibility of manipulation, and the rigidity of the system which is designed to protect the greatest number. Civil service systems have limited discretion on personnel policies. Therefore, psychiatrists must be careful not to act as arbiters for social institutions without a sound and meticulous basis for their participation. For those psychiatrists who participate in the process, the urgent need to do so in accord with professional standards is stressed, recognizing that standards change and that the nature of participation will be scrutinized by many in society outside the profession.