Physische Attraktivität und Wahlerfolg. Eine empirische Analyse am Beispiel der Wahlkreiskandidaten bei der Bundestagswahl 2002

Even if there is a vast body of literature on the attractiveness stereotype, little is known about the effects of the physical attractiveness of politicians. This holds true especially with regard to the relationship between physical attractiveness and electoral success. Taking the German Federal Election of 2002 as an example, the effect of the attractiveness of the candidates in the constituencies on their personal votes is analyzed. The attractiveness is judged by a group of raters on the basis of photographs used by the candidates for their self-representation. By means of multiple linear regression analysis it can be shown that the physical attractiveness of the candidates in the constituencies has a statistically significant and politically relevant impact on the share of votes they receive.     

Ist die „Dominanz von Akademikern in den Parteien“ ein Befund von eigenem Wert? Ein Plädoyer für den angemessenen Einsatz multivariater Analysen in der empirischen Parteimitgliederforschung

Ohne Zusammenfassung     

Online-Anhang zu „Jenseits von Distanz und Richtung. Die Verbundmessung von Politikpräferenzen im Vergleich mit dem Distanz- und dem Richtungsmodell des Wählens — Empirische Befunde eines Methodenexperiments“

Ohne Zusammenfassung     

Jenseits von Distanz und Richtung. Die Verbundmessung von Politikpräferenzen im Vergleich mit dem Distanz- und dem Richtungsmodell des Wählens — Empirische Befunde eines Methodenexperiments

The analysis of issue voting is of central importance in empirical electoral research. In this context, policy positions of voters and parties are normally surveyed by means of bipolar policy scales developed within the spatial model of voting. Even if such policy scales are widespread, their use can be criticised for a series of theoretical and methodological reasons. Beyond this background, conjoint measurement of policy preferences is presented as an alternative mode of operationalization. Using data from a methodological experiment it is shown that (full profile) conjoint measurement is superior to the use of traditional policy scales in the proximity and the directional model of voting.     

A market based evaluation of the election versus appointment of regulatory commissioners

This paper examines the elected versus appointed commissioner dichotomy from a market value perspective. Previous empirical analysis tends to concentrate on rates rather than examining the impact on shareholders' wealth. We examine life insurance industry data during the period surrounding the passage of California's Proposition 103. The primary impact of the referendum on life insurers is to change the method of commissioner selection from appointment to popular vote. We find that this change significantly reduced the value of life insurers doing business in California. This result is consistent with the recent findings of Boyes and McDowell (1989) and Smartt (1994) using alternative evaluation procedures for firms in other regulated industries. This implies that the change to a popular election of commissioners either increases the level of risk and/or decreases the expected cash flows of regulated firms.     

Talk to Me: An Analysis of Statutes Regulating Police Interviews of Child Victims

Children can be unreliable witnesses, and they are especially vulnerable to questionable interview practices. However, in some crimes like child sexual abuse, children may be the only person capable of providing testimonial evidence. States must balance the needs of bringing criminals who target children to justice and ensuring that due process is upheld to reduce the chances of false convictions. The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention has published a set best-practices for the interviewing of children to achieve this balance. This article conducts a statutory analysis to determine if states are currently following the recommendations of the OJJDP.     

Liberal Versus Conservative Stinks

In a recent Public Opinion Quarterly article “Is the Academy a Liberal Hegemony?,” John Zipp and Rudy Fenwick pit themselves against “right-wing activists and scholars,” citing our scholarship (Klein and Stern in Academic Questions 18(1): 40–52, 2005a; Klein and Western in Academic Questions 18(1): 53–65, 2005). Here, we analyze Zipp and Fenwick’s characterization of our research and find it faulty. We, then, turn to their self-identification “liberal vs. conservative” findings and show they concord with our analysis. If one feels that it is a problem that humanities and social science faculty at 4-year colleges and universities are vastly predominantly democratic voters, mostly with views that may called establishment-left, progressive, or status-quo oriented, then such concerns should not be allayed by Zipp and Fenwick’s article. We commence the article with a criticism of the “liberal versus conservative” framework because it is the source of much of the confusion surrounding controversies such as the one over the ideological profile of faculty.