Classifying the torture experiences of refugees living in the United States

Few research studies have systematically categorized the types of torture experienced around the world. The purpose of this study is to categorize the diverse traumatic events that are defined as torture, and determine how these torture types relate to demographics and symptom presentation. Data for 325 individuals were obtained through a retrospective review of records from the Bellevue/NYU for Survivors of Torture. A factor analysis generated a model with five factors corresponding to witnessing torture of others, torture of family members, physical beating, rape/sexual assault, and deprivation/passive torture. These factors were significantly correlated with a number of demographic variables (sex, education, and region of origin). Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, anxiety, and depression symptoms were significantly correlated with the rape factor but no other factors were uniquely associated with psychological distress. The results offer insight into the nature of torture and differences in responses.     

The Impact of State Laws Protecting Abortion Clinics and Reproductive Rights on Crimes Against Abortion Providers: Deterrence, Backlash, or Neither?

Since Roe v. Wade, most states have passed laws either restricting or further protecting reproductive rights. During a wave of anti-abortion violence in the early 1990s, several states also enacted legislation protecting abortion clinics, staff, and patients. One hypothesis drawn from the theoretical literature predicts that these laws provide a deterrent effect and thus fewer anti-abortion crimes in states that protect clinics and reproductive rights. An alternative hypothesis drawn from the literature expects a backlash effect from radical members of the movement and thus more crimes in states with protective legislation. We tested these competing hypotheses by taking advantage of unique data sets that gauge the strength of laws protecting clinics and reproductive rights and that provide self-report victimization data from clinics. Employing logistic regression and controlling for several potential covariates, we found null effects and thus no support for either hypothesis. The null findings were consistent across a number of different types of victimization. Our discussion contextualizes these results in terms of previous research on crimes against abortion providers, discusses alternative explanations for the null findings, and considers the implications for future policy development and research.     

Back to first principles: a new model for the regulation of drug promotion

The US Food and Drug Administration''s (‘FDA’ or the ‘Agency’) current regulatory framework for drug promotion, by significantly restricting the ability of drug manufacturers to communicate important, accurate, up-to-date scientific information about their products that is truthful and non-misleading, runs afoul of the First Amendment and actually runs counter to the Agency''s public health mission. Our article proposes a New Model that represents an initial proposal for a modern, sustainable regulatory framework that comprehensively addresses drug promotion while protecting the public health, protecting manufacturers’ First Amendment rights, establishing clear and understandable rules, and maintaining the integrity of the FDA approval process. The New Model would create three categories of manufacturer communications—(1) Scientific Exchange and Other Exempt Communications, (2) Non-Core Communications, and (3) Core Communications—that would be regulated consistent with the First Amendment and according to the strength of the government''s interest in regulating the specific communications included within each category. The New Model should address the FDA''s concerns related to off-label speech while protecting drug manufacturers’ freedom to engage in truthful and non-misleading communications about their products.     

The future of terrorism research: a review essay

This essay sets forth a research agenda to begin filling some key gaps in terrorism studies. Since the September 2001 Al Qaeda attacks against the World Trade Center towers and the Pentagon that claimed over 3000 lives, interest in terrorism research has increased. After these attacks, the United States and other governments prioritized the scientific study of the causes of and responses to terrorism. Importantly though, our review of the terrorism literature demonstrates that despite this progress, intriguing questions remain underexplored or altogether unexplored. This essay identifies four gaps in terrorism studies: (1) employing non-terrorist comparison groups, (2) broadening the dependent variable (focus of study), (3) exploring exceptions/anomalies to “established” findings, and (4) engaging measurement issues. We discuss these issues and outline a research agenda that could begin to fill these gaps.     

Gendered Genocide: The Socially Destructive Process of Genocidal Rape,Killing, and Displacement in Darfur

Accounts of mass atrocities habitually focus on one kind of violence and its archetypal victim, inviting uncritical, ungendered misconceptions: for example, rape only impacts women; genocide is only about dead, battle‐aged men. We approach collective violence as multiple, intersecting forms of victimization, targeted and experienced through differential social identities, and translated throughout communities. Through mixed‐method analyses of Darfuri refugees' testimonies, we show (a) gendered causes and collective effects of selective killing, sexual violence, and anti‐livelihood crimes, (b) how they cause displacement, (c) that they can be genocidal and empirically distinct from nongenocidal forms, (d) how the process of genocidal social destruction can work, and (e) how it does work in Darfur. Darfuris are victimized through gender roles, yielding a gendered meaning‐making process that communicates socially destructive messages through crimes that selectively target other genders. The collective result is displacement and destruction of Darfuris' ways of life: genocide.     

Protection motivation theory as a theoretical framework for understanding the use of protective measures

The use of defensive measures can be a double-edged sword: it can provide the means to protect people and property from potential criminal victimization, but can also be a costly and possibly unnecessary endeavor. However, research examining the factors contributing to the decision whether or not to engage in protective measures is often limited in both quantity and scope. In this article, we propose a theoretical framework for understanding the use of protective measures in response to criminal victimization threats based on Ronald Rogers’ protection motivation theory. Our discussion details Rogers’ theory, suggests variables and measures appropriate for the context of criminal victimization and protective responses, and provides guidance on testing and model adaptation issues. We hope that this will encourage further model development and testing to improve the understanding of individual protective behavior in response to crime or the threat of crime.     

Voting Counts: Participation in the Measurement of Democracy

The measures of democracy commonly used in empirical research suffer notable limitations, primarily the exclusion of participation. As a result, quantitative studies may undervalue the effect of democracy on important social outcomes or misinterpret the aspect of democracy responsible for that effect. We respond by introducing and validating two variants of a new indicator, the Participation Enhanced Polity Score (PEPS), which augments institutional factors with the breadth of citizen participation. We demonstrate, using statistical evidence on democratic persistence, basic needs fulfillment, and gender equality, that no measure of democracy can be considered an accurate representation of its basic character without directly including participation as a core component. Bruce E. Moon is professor of international relations at Lehigh University in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania. He is the author ofThe Political Economy of Basic Human Needs (Cornell University Press. 1991) and two editions ofThe Dilemmas of International Trade (Westview Press, 1996, 2000). Jennifer Harvey Birdsall is a researcher for a NGO in Geneva, Switzerland. She received her B.A. in international relations and economics from Lehigh University and her M.S. in global affairs from Rutgers University-Newark. Sylvia Ciesluk is pursuing an M.A. at the Fletcher School at Tufts University. She received her B.S. in economics from Lehigh University. Lauren M. Garlett is a geography teacher at Bellamy Middle School in Chicopee, Massachusetts. She received both her B.A in international relations and her M.Ed. in secondary education from Lehigh University. Joshua J. Hermias is associate director of the Global Young Leaders Conference in Washington, D.C. He received his B.A. in economics from Lehigh University and his M.A. in international development from the University of East Anglia, Norwich, England. Elizabeth Mendenhall is pursuing a Masters in International Affairs (MIA) in economic and political development at Columbia University. She received a B.A. in international relations at Lehigh University. Patrick D. Schmid is a Ph.D. candidate in computer science at Lehigh University. He received both his B.S. and M.S. in computer science from Lehigh University. Wai Hong Wong is a research associate at FactSet Research Systems. He received his B.A. in international relations and economics at Lehigh University. We are grateful for the helpful suggestions of Frank Davis, Bill Dixon, Chaim Kaufmann, Rajan Menon, Pamela Paxton, Larry Taylor, and the anonymous reviewers.