An unusual entrance wound associated with rimfire rifles.

In many cases of self-inflicted contact wounds of the head with rimfire rifles, we have noted that the entrance wound appears unusual: in 50% of cases studied, a pencil-like extension or zone of blackened and seared skin extends downward from the entrance. The most probable cause for the appearance of this wound is a momentary break in contact between the muzzle and skin as the victim reaches for the trigger with resultant escape of a jet of hot sooty gas. Whereas not unique for rimfire rifles, such a wound from a handgun is uncommon.     

What's in a word?

In this paper, we argue that citizens' views about the personality characteristics of their political leaders are subject to systematic bias, motivated by the desire to maintain existing impressions. We report two studies designed to explore how such trait biases, involving judgments of real politicians, are manifested. Drawing on work in social psychology (John, Hampson, and Goldberg, 1991), we hypothesize, and demonstrate experimentally, that traitbreadth plays a critical role in the judgment process. Specifically, people tend to select broad positive traits (e.g., kind) and narrower negative traits (gullible) to describe politicians that they like; conversely, people tend to select broad negative traits (unintelligent) and narrower positive traits (soft-hearted) to describe politicians that they dislike. This trait breadth attribution bias was much stronger among those who had a positive, rather than negative, impression of the politician, a result we discuss in the context of related evidence of affective asymmetries in political judgment (e.g., Kinder, 1986; Marcus and Mackuen, 1993). More generally, these studies illustrate the potential associated with integrating cognitive, affective, and motivational factors in the service of fully understanding political judgment and choice.     

Is Sex Too Good for the Working Class? Education and Oppression

The United States has three school systems, one of them excellent, another borderline in quality, and the third thoroughly inadequate. Together they satisfy the needs of the economy. Since the earliest days of the republic, national and state governments have resisted expenditures for children of the working class, not only for their education but also for purposes of health, housing, nutrition, and the financial and psychological security of their parents—all of these relevant to quality of education and educational achievement. Significant improvement in schooling for all children requires societal changes that are spelled out in this article, along with proposals about how to implement those changes.     

The Ironies of Helping: Social Interventions and Executable Subjects

Law and society scholars have theorized about the link between capital punishment and the hegemony of individualism, but few offer empirical investigations to illustrate how individualism makes capital punishment possible (and vice versa) in the contemporary United States. In order to fill this gap, we analyze the legal and human service records that were compiled in the construction of one executable subject, Daniel Farnsworth. Using a critical discourse approach, we look at what was said and not said about Daniel in the records created by various helping agencies. In our analysis, we demonstrate how the helping agencies involved in Daniel's life repeatedly relied on an individuating psychological paradigm that led them to produce decontextualized catalogs of his actions and characteristics. Next, we illustrate how these pathologizing accounts were, ironically, later invoked in court in the name of preserving his life. Finally, we explain how "helping" discourses, along with the rules that regulate capital defense practice, straightjacket defense attorneys into reinforcing individualism in this context.