Argument Repertoire as a Reliable and Valid Measure of Opinion Quality: Electronic Dialogue During Campaign 2000

A new measure of opinion quality that we name "argument repertoire" (AR) is introduced and evaluated. AR refers to the relevant reasons that one has for one's own opinions and the relevant reasons that others with opposite opinions might have. The measure is shown to be reliable and to have construct validity. Those with elevated AR also were more likely to attend on-line deliberative groups during the presidential election and to contribute to those conversations. Those who participated in online deliberations tended to have higher AR scores on particular issues that were discussed. The role of AR in deliberative political groups is explored.     

Laudable aims and problematic consequences,or: The ‘flow’ of knowledge is not neutral

This is a comment on how environments apparently favourable to open-ended and exploratory research, as across disciplines, can turn out to be rather otherwise. Social anthropology is the discipline in question here, and the current rhetoric of interdisciplinarity the source of some (new) problems.     

Globalization forces and social policy choices: Glass half‐full or half‐empty?

Globalization, Europeanization and the End of Scandinavian Social Democracy?Edited by robert geyer, christine ingebritsen and jonathon w. moses. London: Macmillan. 2000. Changing Politics of Canadian Social Policy. By james j. rice and michael j. prince. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. 2000. Four Strong Winds: Understanding the Growing Challenges to Health Care. By michael b. decter Toronto: Stoddard. 2000. Now resident on Vancouver Island, the author was until recently a faculty member in the Department of political science at the University of Windsor.     

Finding fresh evidence

Fresh Evidence, New Witnesses: Finding Women's History, edited by Margaret Allen, Mary Hutchinson, Alison Mackinnon. (South Australian Government Printer), Adelaide, 1989.     

Variables influencing sentencing severity: Intercourt differences in Connecticut

Studies of criminal-court dispositions have traditionally aggregated courts along political and geographic boundaries. This article suggests that courts should be analyzed individually, even within the same jurisdiction, as a means of increasing the explanatory capacity of the variables involved. Further, it is contended that intercourt differences are a result of organizational influences operating within each court.