A Review of: “Social Decision Making: Social Dilemmas,Social Values,and Ethical Judgments Edited by Roderick M. Kramer,Ann E. Tenbrunsel,and Max H. Bazerman”

ABSTRACT

Our ability to interpret, generalize, and build theory across public service motivation (PSM) studies is limited by lack of knowledge regarding the equivalence of different PSM measures that researchers frequently use. While past research has given considerable attention to validating multidimensional measures of PSM, this study investigates the psychometric properties of the global measures that have been used to provide much of the empirical evidence on PSM. Building on the lessons of other research using global and multidimensional measures, we first discuss the strengths and weaknesses of existing global measures of PSM relative to those of the multidimensional measures. After highlighting the potential merit of global scales, we then provide empirical justification for global scales. Using five different data sets to compare commonly used global measures of PSM, our findings suggest that these different measures are not only highly correlated with each other but also display a similar pattern and strength of relationships with important correlates of PSM. These findings suggest that these measures do tap into the same conceptual space and help validate our continued reliance on empirical studies that have used different measures to build our understanding of PSM.     

Der Europ?ische Gerichtshof als Motor der Integration: Eine akteursbezogene Erkl?rung

For nearly five decades, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) has developed a decisively pro-European case law and has become the ??engine of integration??. Institutional explanations shed light on the Court??s room for manoevre. They have to be complemented by actor-centered explanations that shed light on the judges?? motives of action. The explanation offered by the following paper is unfolded in two steps. In the first one, the article describes idiosyncrasies of the European law discourse that already shaped the judges before they were appointed. The analysis of the idiosyncrasies corresponds to a scepticism towards the idea of national sovereignty, a belief in the necessity of creative and idealist, law-augmenting judges and a dominance of output-oriented legitimization strategies. In a second step, the article shows that in the sociological sense the ECJ judges constitute a group. While the individual judges share an understanding of the aims and functions of European law, the group develops its own identity and grants status to those who perform successful actions with respect to the common integration agenda. This explanation is more realistic than ??rational choice?? explanations which point to the direct and personal benefits that judges derive from their pro-European case law.