Extending the General Theory of Crime to “The East:” Low Self-Control in Japanese Late Adolescents

This study examined the measurement of low self-control as well as the low self-control-deviance relationship in a sample of N = 335 Japanese late adolescents. Participants completed the Grasmick et al. low self-control instrument and the Normative Deviance Scale (NDS). Findings indicated that the low self-control measure was a valid and reliable indicator of low self-control among male and female Japanese late adolescents and that it was multi-dimensional. Furthermore, the study provided evidence that low self-control was consistently related to diverse measures of deviance, ranging from trivial to more serious norm-violating behaviors (e.g., assault). Finally, in a series of comparisons of partial unstandardized regression coefficients between Japanese and U.S. late adolescents, the study found that the low self-control-deviance relationship was invariant across all measures of deviance with the exception of alcohol use. Findings are discussed in terms of their importance for cross-cultural/cross-national predictions made by the General Theory of Crime.     

Taiwan and Tiananmen: An analysis of Taiwan’s policy toward the democracy movement

This article examines the Republic of Chin’s (Taiwan) policy toward the democracy movement that swept the People’s Republic of China during April, May, and June 1989. It outlines the evolution of Taiwan’s policy toward the campaign, explores other options that were available and explains why the policy adopted, a measured approach toward events on the mainland, was the best option available to Taiwan.     

Is approval voting an ‘unmitigated evil’?: A response to Brams,Fishburn, and Merrill

Brams, Fishburn, and Merrill (1988) contend that the indeterminacy of approval voting (AV), introduced in our paper (1988), is not a vice, but a surpassing virtue of AV. They do not compare the negative versus the positive features of AV, so their assertion remains a conjecture. Our response emphasizes the need to determine the costs of AV and to evaluate them against any merits. Moreover, by correcting and answering BFM's comments, the argument against AV becomes much stronger. This is because we show that AV's region of indeterminacy is quite large; it includes most profiles. Some of the consequences of this instability are that the AV outcome can negate the voter's true wishes, that the AV outcome can be volatile even to minor fluctuations of voter's decisions, and that AV is one of the most susceptible systems to manipulation by small groups of voters (for example, small, maverick groups could determine the AV outcome). Under specific circumstances, AV may be appropriate. To identify these situations we propose the more accurate name of the "Unsophisticated Voter System."