Tullock on motivated inquiry: expert-induced uncertainty disguised as risk

Gordon Tullock denied scientific status to economics because economists can trade results with the subject of our analysis. We suppose this trading to be the fate of all disciplines in which the results have consequences for well-being of those studied. Non-transparent trading in a statistical context gives no reason to believe that the sampling distribution of the estimates will be what it is believed to be. This false belief turns risk to uncertainty. Taking trading between experts and subjects as inevitable, we ask if the trade is fair. When scientific unanimity fails, can Rawlsian unanimity replace it?     

The Measurement of Democracy: Towards a New Paradigm

Mainstream political science on democracy has been criticised for ‘regime bias’. This has led political scientists to draw on a narrow range of democratic theory that considers democratic potential only at the cost of ignoring democratic purpose, to ignore other units of observation than the regime, notably the individual citizen, and to overlook advances in measurement theory. A robust normative account of democratic quality, it is argued, should rest on three foundations. First, measurement should start with observations of the regime. No account of democratic quality should be considered valid without an account of the degree of democracy in the regime. This analysis should be grounded in standard democratic theory. Secondly, the measurement effort should follow through to observations of how the potential in the regime is manifested in the lives of citizens. No account of democratic quality should be considered valid without an account of how well the system delivers for citizens. This analysis should be grounded in a theory of the purpose of democracy. Thirdly, pronouncements on democratic quality should finally be made only from some combination or index of information from both systems analysis and individual analysis. That combined analysis should be grounded in measurement theory, specifically the law of methodological individualism and the principle of double book-keeping.     

The Role of Youth’s Ratings of the Importance of Socially Supportive Behaviors in the Relationship Between Social Support and Self-Concept

The goal of this study was to investigate the relationship between the perceived frequency and perceived importance of social support with youth’s self-concept. Data from a large representative sample of 921 children and adolescents in grades 3 through 12 were analyzed. Results indicated that the relationships between the frequency of social support from parents, teachers, classmates, and close friends with self-concept were significant. However, only the perceived importance of social support from teachers was significantly related to self-concept. Finally, an interaction was found between the frequency of social support and the importance of social support from classmates and close friends on self-concept. These results suggest that self-evaluations of the importance of teacher support may be especially influential for youths’ self-concept, and that the ability to discount the value of support from classmates and friends, when it is lacking, may be protective to the self-concept of children and adolescents.

Experimentalist governance: An introduction

This symposium critically engages with the volume Experimentalist Governance in the European Union: Towards a New Architecture (2010), edited by Charles F. Sabel and Jonathan Zeitlin. “Experimentalist Governance” (EG) opens up an original theoretical perspective on the emergent governance architecture of the EU and sheds new light on developments in key policy sectors. This symposium brings together a transatlantic group of distinguished political scientists and legal scholars to discuss the added value of EG as a concept for analysis, its theoretical underpinnings, empirical relevance, and normative implications, in terms of legitimacy. Contributors discuss EG from different disciplinary and theoretical perspectives, referring to a variety of empirical examples in the EU context and beyond. The symposium closes with a response from the authors to their critics. This collection of essays sheds new light on debates around the nature of the EU and democratic governance beyond the nation state.     

Long‐Haired women,short‐haired spies: Gender,espionage, and America's war in Vietnam

Women who fought the Americans and the South Vietnamese in the Vietnam War performed many tasks. Some were the usual women's work: nursing, providing food, shelter, repairing trails, and preparing ambushes. But, they also were useful as combatants and spies. Less obvious than men, they exchanged information on troop movements while at market. They were couriers, demonstrators and recruiters. They fought and also performed intelligence through ingenious strategems. One old woman cut off her hair, was half naked, and convinced the Southern troops that she was harmless; then she entered a base and gathered information that aided the NLF forces to defeat the enemy. The communist women were indeed a key to victory.     

Das Umweltgesetzbuch 2009

Ohne Zusammenfassung     

Assessing student group work: is there a right way to do it?

Many law courses include at least some elements of group work within compulsory or optional modules. The benefits of group work include at least four of the seven “Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education”.¹ In addition, employers consistently ask for good team-working skills, evidence of which is often provided by reference to group projects at university. Previous research by the authors² confirms other reports in the literature that many students find group work difficult, and particularly resent other students “freeloading” from their work.³ They also experience frustration at non-participation by other students and not being able to choose their team mates. This resentment can be exacerbated if all students receive the same mark for the finished project regardless of input. In this article, the authors reflect upon our experiences of setting and grading group work in our own courses and institutions. We will consider different assessment approaches, including peer assessment,⁴ lecturer assessment, student participation – enhancing student understanding of assessment criteria,⁵ a mixture of peer and lecturer assessment, assessment of group work as part of a portfolio,⁶ and non-assessed group work feeding into individual assessments.