Are accurate witnesses more likely to make absolute judgments?

The present study tested the Two-Judgment Theory of Eyewitness Identification Accuracy. Specifically, the extent to which participants were able to engage in an absolute judgment strategy was manipulated by varying the time available to view a lineup. Providing a limited exposure to a lineup should “interrupt” decision making, whereby witnesses can only engage a relative strategy, thus leading to higher false positive responding given a target-absent lineup. Seventy-four adults viewed a 1-minute video that exposed them to an unknown target and subsequently viewed the lineup for a limited (2 s) or an unlimited amount of time. Although false positive rates were similar across conditions, accurate witnesses were more confident than inaccurate witnesses. Confidence was negatively correlated with response latency such that witnesses who took more time to make a decision were less confident in their decisions compared to witnesses who made more rapid decisions. Response latency did not differ for accurate and inaccurate witnesses. Limitations and suggestions for future research on the Two-Judgment Theory are discussed.     

Gangs and public policy

Research Summary Attention to gang issues has dramatically increased in the last several decades, both in the scholarly literature and in law enforcement. Despite widespread attention to the gang problem, researchers, police officers, and lawmakers have yet to agree on definitions used to characterize and understand the problem. This article summarizes the existing literature concerning the importance of accurately defining and classifying gang members, documents and analyzes state and federal gang legislation in the United States, and provides a detailed analysis of one state's system that might serve as a useful model for other states. Policy Implications Serious risks to public safety and civil liberties are associated with Type 1 and Type 2 classification errors regarding gang membership. The wide variation in state statutory definitions of “gang member” and in the construction and administration of gang databases presents major challenges for policymakers and academic researchers. This article addresses these challenges and argues that a more rigorous and unified system, based on one state's existing model, might be possible and could offer significant advantages in our efforts to address the delinquent and criminal behavior of gangs throughout the United States.     

早产和胎盘早剥的损伤程度鉴定(附1例分析)

本文从1例孕妇的损伤程度鉴定着手,对《人体重伤鉴定标准》的第78条、第45条、第92条等条款的应用进行研究,结合案情对现行标准应用误区进行分析,提出症结所在,为了保证鉴定结论的质量,对《人体重伤鉴定标准》进行完善和修改势在必行。     

Policy learning as complex contagion: how social networks shape organizational beliefs in forest-based climate change mitigation

Policy Sciences - Policy learning can alter the perceptions of both the seriousness and the causes of a policy problem, thus also altering the perceived need to do...     

How Public Opinion Information Changes Politicians’ Opinions and Behavior

Political Behavior - Numerous representation studies suggest that political elites are responsive to the expressed preferences of their voters, but scholars in the field have called for...     

The private security complex and its regulation in Africa: select examples from the continent

ABSTRACT

This article aims to provide an overview of the primary trends and developments of the domestic private security industry in select countries in Africa, while also further reflecting on a selection of operational challenges and obstacles inherent to the industry and its regulation. In particular, field research was conducted in Uganda to explore the nature of the state ownership of private security companies so as to further highlight the regulatory difficulties. Our findings raise a number of questions pertaining to the theorising of private security regulation answers of which, we conclude, may find utility in drawing on the concept of “hybridity” as an alternative heuristic tool to engage with the realities of state regulation in the Global South.     

An Evaluation Crucible: Evaluating Policy Advice in Australian Central Agencies

Policy advice is a core function of government that until quite recently remained outside the formal processes of performance evaluation. Evaluation, by its very nature, is designed to question both the effectiveness and relevance of government activities; applying it to policy advice opens up a traditionally confidential and politically sensitive arena. This paper reports on an evaluation experiment in Australian government — policy management reviews (PMRs) — that sought to evaluate the quality of central agency policy advice. It traces the development of the PMR model around interdepartmental committee processes, the bureaucratic politics that diluted the focus on policy outcomes, and examines how central agencies steered evaluation away from questions of public accountability towards arrangements for achieving more effective control of the processes underpinning production of advice. By targeting the process rather than outcomes of policy advising, PMRs sought unsuccessfully to adhere to the divide between management and policy and, in doing so, marked out the limits to performance evaluation.