Canada's GBA+ framework in a (post)pandemic world: Issues,tensions and paths forward

This article traces the theoretical foundations, evolution, and limitations of Gender-Based Analysis Plus (GBA+), which is the Government of Canada's primary framework for attending to diversity and inclusion in public policy. We argue that GBA+ is, in its current form, inadequate to guide ambitious and transformative policy in the post-pandemic years given four interlocking issues: (1) a weak integration of intersectionality; (2) insufficient attention to the power structures and socio-political context undergirding social relations and policymaking; (3) an instrumental understanding of policy; and (4) a misreading of identity. Drawing on feminist, intersectional and post-structuralist methods, we adjust the GBA+ framework with the aim of addressing the conceptual shortcomings identified in our analysis. Ultimately, we demonstrate how a more explicit engagement with notions of intersectionality, power and policy's instrumental and productive aspects can enrich the ways we think about public policy as both a mechanism and a venue for transformative change.     

If Brain Scans Really Detected Deception,Who Would Volunteer to be Scanned?

Abstract: Recent neuroimaging studies investigating the neural correlates of deception among healthy people, have raised the possibility that such methods may eventually be applied during legal proceedings. Were this so, who would volunteer to be scanned? We report a “natural experiment” casting some light upon this question. Following broadcast of a television series describing our team’s investigative neuroimaging of deception in 2007, we received unsolicited (public) correspondence for 12 months. Using a customized template to examine this material, three independent assessors unanimously rated 30 of an initial 56 communications as unequivocally constituting requests for a “scan” (to demonstrate their author’s “innocence”). Compared with the rest, these index communications were more likely to originate from incarcerated males, who were also more likely to engage in further correspondence. Hence, in conclusion, if neuroimaging were to become an acceptable means of demonstrating innocence then incarcerated males may well constitute those volunteering for such investigation.     

“Intuitive” Lie Detection of Children’s Deception by Law Enforcement Officials and University Students

Adults ability to detect childrens deception was examined. Police officers, customs officers, and university students attempted to differentiate between children who lied or told the truth about a transgression. When children were simply questioned about the event (Experiment 1), the adult groups could not distinguish between lie-tellers and truth-tellers. However, participants were more accurate when the children had participated in moral reasoning tasks (Experiment 2) or promised to tell the truth (Experiment 3) before being interviewed. Additional exposure to the children did not affect accuracy (Experiment 4). Customs officers were more certain about their judgments than other groups, but no more accurate. Overall, adults have a limited ability to identify childrens deception, regardless of their experience with lie detection.     

Eyewitness Accuracy Rates in Police Showup and Lineup Presentations: A Meta-Analytic Comparison

Meta-analysis is used to compare identification accuracy rates in showups and lineups. Eight papers were located, providing 12 tests of the hypothesis and including 3013 participants. Results indicate that showups generate lower choosing rates than lineups. In target present conditions, showups and lineups yield approximately equal hit rates, and in target absent conditions, showups produce a significantly higher level of correct rejections. False identification rates are approximately equal in showups and lineups when lineup foil choices are excluded from analysis. Dangerous false identifications are more numerous for showups when an innocent suspect resembles the perpetrator. Function of lineup foils, assessment strategies for false identifications, and the potential impact of biases in lineup practice are suggested as additional considerations in evaluation of showup versus lineup efficacy.     

Measuring Attitudes toward the United States Supreme Court

It is conventional in research on the legitimacy of the U.S. Supreme Court to rely on a survey question asking about confidence in the leaders of the Court to indicate something about the esteem with which that institution is regarded by the American people. The purpose of this article is to investigate the validity of this measure. Based on a nationally representative survey conducted in 2001, we compare confidence with several different measures of Court legitimacy. Our findings indicate that the confidence replies seem to reflect both short-term and long-term judgments about the Court, with the greater influence coming from satisfaction with how the Court is performing at the moment. We suggest a new set of indicators for measuring the legitimacy of the Court and offer some evidence on the structure of the variance in these items.