Consulting critics: A new role for academic policy analysts

It is by now widely accepted that social science research has only an indirect and general impact on public policymaking. Academic social science research, it is often argued, is antithetical to policy research: the former is animated by traditional scientific canons while the latter is specific and problem-oriented. Moreover, modern bureaucracies are now understood as political environments within which pure research will be routinely ignored if it does not serve someone's interests. For these and other reasons, social scientists are being encouraged either to eschew policy research or not to expect much influence. This article provides an alternative model of social scientists in the policy process, as consulting critics reviewing, analyzing and commenting upon substantive policy research. This model holds benefits for both scholars and clients, turns the canons of scientific inquiry into assets instead of liabilities, and responds to some of the concerns recently raised in the literature concerning the role of social science in the policy process.     

Adjunctive use of scanning electron microscopy in bite mark analysis: a three-dimensional study

An examination of a case in which adjunctive use of scanning electron microscopy (SEM) demonstrated the presence of unusual three-dimensional characteristics in a bite mark. Despite the fact that many bite marks do not show "depth," demonstration of the presence of this third dimension can produce significant data for evidentiary purposes. In some instances, these data may transform what seem to be class characteristics of a bite mark into individual characteristics and thus impart much more uniqueness to the evidence. Because of the high level of resolution and magnification of SEM, some three-dimensional characteristics not visible to the eye can be shown quite clearly by its use. Emphasis will be given to the value of SEM as a tool of the forensic odontologist in bite mark analysis.