Public attitudes toward prison capacity expansion in Mississippi

This paper presents the results of an exploratory study designed to identify and determine the effects of social and economic factors on Mississippians’ attitudes toward prison expansion strategies. Data were obtained from a statewide survey, utilizing a random digit dialing telephone sampling procedure. The study sample consists of 606 respondents. Favorable attitudes toward correctional facilities were hypothesized to be explained by fear of crime, presence of an existing facility, perceived economic impact of prisons, gender, race, age, and income. The results of the regression analysis revealed that the presence of an existing prison facility, perceived economic benefits, race, and education were significant predictors of attitudes toward prison expansion strategies among Mississippians. Possible explanations for the findings and directions for future research are discussed. This research was supported by grant #30401903821 from the Department of Public Safety, Division of Public Safety Planning of the Governor’s Office, Jackson, Mississippi. Please send all correspondence to: Craig Robertson, Dept. of Sociology, Montana State University, Bozeman, MT. 59717.     

Small group decision making: The uncertain role of information in reducing uncertainty

Although decision-making analysis has been widely pursued in political science and other fields, most emphasize an outcome orientation, ignoring (or assuming away) the process by which decisions are made. This study treats the process of decision making at the small group level by applying the cognitive information processing model to the methods by which search behavior reduces uncertainty in the collective environment. After examining the theoretical constraints on search behavior, an experiment is performed on student subjects with two of the constraints—information level and decision rule—operationalized as treatment variables on the volume and type of search by individuals in a small group environment. The findings suggest that increasing information availability and requiring consensus decisions will increase search, but that subjects are easily overloaded with information, increasing—not reducing—their uncertainty about their decisions.     

Are individuals' familiarity judgments diagnostic of prior contact?

The extensive eyewitness memory research literature has been restricted to memory for strangers. Although it is often assumed that eyewitnesses are more accurate identifying familiar than unfamiliar individuals, little is known about whether individuals' familiarity judgments are diagnostic of prior contact. Caucasian and Asian sophomores (N=139) in two small private high schools viewed yearbook pictures of (a) graduated students from their school who were seniors (fourth year) when participants were freshmen (first year) (familiar) and (b) unfamiliar individuals, and responded whether each was ‘familiar’. The design was completely crossed; familiar faces at each school served as unfamiliar faces at the other school. Based on d′ data, the cross-race effect resulted for familiarity judgments. Also, although individuals' familiarity judgments were diagnostic of prior contact, accuracy was low (mean hit rate=0.42; mean false alarm rate=0.23), rendering an eyewitness's report of having seen a perpetrator casually in the past of limited forensic value.     

Plea bargaining and appraisals of eyewitness evidence by prosecutors and defense attorneys

A sample of defense attorneys and prosecutors from matched California counties participated in a two-part study. Study 1A reports the results of a survey regarding how influential each of the 17 eyewitness factors is in affecting the accuracy of real eyewitness identifications. Generally, both attorney groups considered all eyewitness factors to be influential; on only 6 of the 17 factors were defense attorneys more likely than prosecutors to provide higher importance ratings. In Study 1B, the attorneys answered questions regarding their willingness to plea bargain after reading each of four scenarios in which (1) same- versus cross-race identification and (2) whether the perpetrator was familiar were experimentally manipulated. Both eyewitness factors influenced plea bargaining decisions, and effects were generally consistent for both attorney groups. Results confirm that plea bargaining decisions at least by defense attorneys are made ‘in the shadow of the trial,’ and that appraisals of the strength of eyewitness evidence play a significant role in these decisions.     

The money blind: how to stop industry bias in biomedical science, without violating the First Amendment

The pharmaceutical and medical device industries use billions of dollars to support the biomedical science that physicians, regulators, and patients use to make healthcare decisions--the decisions that drive an increasingly large portion of the American economy. Compelling evidence suggests that this industry money buys favorable results, biasing the outcomes of scientific research. Current efforts to manage the problem, including disclosure mandates and peer reviews, are ineffective. A blinding mechanism, operating through an intermediary such as the National Institutes of Health, could instead be developed to allow industry support of science without allowing undue influence. If the editors of biomedical journals fail to mandate that industry funders utilize such a solution, the federal government has several regulatory levers available, including conditioning federal funding and direct regulation, both of which could be done without violating the First Amendment.