Measuring the cost-efficiency of basic research investment: Input-output approaches

Restricted research budgets, expanding claims for resources, and steeply escalating costs have increased the demand for methods that establish or predict the efficiency or productivity of expenditures on basic research. Irvine and Martin (I-M) have recently advocated head-to-head efficiency comparisons of research performers using publications and citations. This paper (1) criticizes the I-M approach from the perspective of economics and policy analysis; (2) illustrates the natural production function extension of the I-M approach; (3) demonstrates, by worked out examples, the feasibility of such an extension along with its pitfalls; and (4) argues that combined econometric-bibliometric modeling can be used to improve research allocations with only modest increases in agency “transaction” costs. The paper presents a prototype efficiency analysis using recent NSF data for the behavioral and neural sciences.     

Exploring Regionalism in the Federal District Courts

This study explores regionalism in the appointment and decisionmakingpatterns of federal district judges. We begin with an examinationof the general appointment strategies of Ronald Reagan, JimmyCarter, and other recent presidents. The role of local constraintsin this process is emphasized. Next, the behavior of federaldistrict judges appointed by recent presidents is analyzed bycomparing levels of support for civil rights and civil libertiesclaims in cases decided during the 1977–1985 period. TheReagan appointees' support scores are compared with those ofjudges appointed by Carter and other recent Democratic and Republicanpresidents. Comparisons are made in the nation as a whole andalso across circuits and states. Our findings indicate thatthe Reagan appointees are less supportive of civil rights andliberties claims than judges named to the bench by Carter orother recent Democratic and Republican presidents.     

The Liberal Justification for Local Government: Values and Administrative Expediency

There are several important justifications for autonomous units of local government, derived from the writings of J. S. Mill and later theories concerning the value of pluralism. These arguments fail to show that local government is a morally necessary, as opposed to expedient, adjunct to liberal-democratic government. The paper develops from J. S. Mill's ideas on liberty a more substantive justification for local government based on the principle that local government can be a means for ensuring that the determination of collective decisions are made solely by those people affected by the decision.     

Fire and suicide: a three-year study of self-immolation deaths.

Thirty-two self-immolation deaths by fire, representing about 1% of suicides, occurred in the province of Ontario (population 9 million), Canada, from 1986 through 1988. The victims, mostly male (male/female ratio, 26:6), were between 21 and 71 years old (mean age, 38 years). Although the scene of self-immolation was usually familiar to the deceased, some chose remote locations. Eleven were found dead in motor vehicles. An accelerant, usually gasoline, was used in most cases. Many of these individuals had, at some time, indicated their intent to commit suicide, a few by self-immolation, but only about half had a diagnosed psychiatric illness. Most of the victims had a reason to kill themselves, but the factors that motivated them to chose self-immolation by fire were uncertain. Fourteen individuals died in hospitals from severe burn complications. The remainder were found dead at the scene. The postmortem findings of soot in the airway and elevated carbon monoxide in the blood of most of these victims [the carboxyhemoglobin (COHb) concentration was in one case less than 10%, in ten cases greater than or equal to 10 to 50%, and in seven cases greater than 50%] were helpful in determining that the individuals were not only alive at the time of the fire but also that a significant number died from smoke inhalation and carbon monoxide poisoning. The highest levels of carbon monoxide were observed in victims discovered in motor vehicles.     

The Prevalence of Mental Illness Among Inmates in a Rural State

A limited number of recent empirical studies suggest that inmates suffer from high rates of serious mental illness. Different explanations are offered depending on the type of institution: jail or prison. The literature is based largely on urban samples and does not offer comparisons of rates across types of institution within a single study. The present study examined a random sample of 213 jail and prison inmates in a rural state using the Diagnostic Interview Schedule (III-R). Among jail inmates there was little evidence of high rates of serious mental illness, suggesting the criminalization of mental illness may not be as evident in rural settings as urban areas. Among prison inmates, however, high rates of mental disorders were found, supporting previous findings in urban and rural jurisdictions. Implications of the findings are discussed in the context of a consolidated correctional system.     

SOME NEW EVIDENCE ON THE SERIOUSNESS OF CRIME*

Previous studies of the seriousness of crime have attempted to elicit information from public surveys. This paper reports on an alternative method of ranking the severity of crime. Actual victim injury rates are combined with jury awards in personal injury accident cases to estimate pain, suffering, and fear. Crime-related death rates are combined with estimates of the value of life to arrive at monetary values for the risk of death. These estimates are combined with out-of-pocket costs (such as medical costs and lost wages) to arrive at total dollar estimates of the cost of individual crimes to victims. These dollar estimates are then used to rank the seriousness of crimes. Although these two approaches yield surprisingly similar rankings, the monetary estimates indicate that violent crimes are relatively more costly to victims than survey results might imply.     

Prosecutorial discretion to defer criminalization: The effects of defendant's ascribed and achieved status characteristics

This research contributes to a further understanding of prosecutorial discretion by exploring tenets of casual attribution theory and etiology of bias theory as each informs an uncertainty avoidance perspective on the prosecutor's decision to divert felony drug defendants from criminal prosecution and into a treatment program. The sociolegal consequences of the exercise of this early screening decision are expressed by both conflict theorists and labeling theorists. Our analysis involves estimating main effects and interaction effects of defendant ascribed status and achieved status on the likelihood of diversion. The findings indicate partial support for hypotheses derived, from the theoretical perspectives pursued. In addition these findings point to a more complex model of the subjective nature of the exercise of prosecutorial discretion, a model that benefits from understanding the salience of minimizing uncertainty in the decision to criminals.