Lobbying and lending by banks around the financial crisis by

Despite the unprecedented levels of liquidity provided by the Federal Reserve to banks during the 2007–2008 financial crisis, lending by banks slowed dramatically during and after that global episode. In this study, we propose that, given capital constraints, the lobbying expenditures by banks to combat Dodd-Frank might have crowded out lending activity. A variety of univariate and multivariate tests show that while lending by banks fell significantly around the financial crisis, lobbying rose dramatically. Our results also show that bank lobbying and lending are imperfect substitutes during non-crisis periods. Such substitutability likely is explained by the value perceived in the political connections gained through lobbying, such as the ability to influence regulation, preferential treatment on supervisory or enforcement decisions, and protection against adverse shocks in the form of government bailouts.

     

Pathway to terrorist behaviors: The role of childhood experiences,personality traits,and ideological motivations in a sample of Iraqi prisoners

Radicalization to terrorism is a multifaceted process with no single theory or approach to explain it. Although research has focused on understanding the process, there is still a dearth of studies that examine an empirically driven pathway to terrorism behavior. This study examines a cross-sectional sample of incarcerated men convicted of terrorism in Iraq (N = 160). A questionnaire-guided interview included adverse childhood experiences (ACEs), conduct disorder (CD), antisocial personality disorder (ASPD), religious and political ideology, views about causes of terrorism, and the severity of terrorist acts. Path analysis was employed to examine the relationships between these factors and to identify the model with the best fit. After adjusting for age, employment, and location, results indicated that ACEs positively impacted CD, ASPD, religious guidance, and terrorism attitudes. ASPD positively affected political commitment and terrorism attitudes, but inversely affected current religious commitment. Political commitment inversely influenced terrorism attitudes. Religious commitment positively influenced the prioritization of religion in life, which subsequently impacted terrorism attitudes and behavior severity. Additionally, attitudes toward terrorism directly affected the severity of terrorism behavior. All paths in the final model were statistically significant at p < 0.05. Although these findings may be limited in generalizability due to the unique sample, results support the complex and interdependent nature of childhood and adult experiences on the development of both terrorism attitudes and the severity of terrorism behavior.     

One Thing Leads to Another: Making Sense of East Asia’s Repeated Tensions

Both the East and Southeast China Seas have been home to a series of repeated episodes of tension between the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and its neighbors. Much of the existing literature either treats such episodes as isolated data points or as the manifestation of underlying structural factors. In this paper, we argue that repeated tensions can have important effects on subsequent interactions, generating emergent dynamics with dangerous consequences. What is more, we believe those dynamics to already be in play in several of the disputes within East Asia today. Examining recent developments in PRC-Japan and PRC-Philippines relations, we seek to shed light on how iterated episodes of tension are shaping the trajectory of interactions in both dyads. We believe these insights can inform efforts to understand relations in the region and beyond, given the growing frequency and intensity of repeated tensions among actors.     

Decoding Prejudice Toward Hispanics: Group Cues and Public Reactions to Threatening Immigrant Behavior

Consistent with theories of modern racism, we argue that white, non-Hispanic Americans have adopted a “coded,” race-neutral means of expressing prejudice toward Hispanic immigrants by citing specific behaviors that are deemed inappropriate—either because they are illegal or threatening in an economic or cultural manner. We present data from a series of nationally representative, survey-embedded experiments to tease out the distinct role that anti-Hispanic prejudice plays in shaping public opinion on immigration. Our results show that white Americans take significantly greater offense to transgressions such as being in the country illegally, “working under the table,” and rejecting symbols of American identity, when the perpetrating immigrant is Hispanic rather than White (or unspecified). In addition, we demonstrate that these ethnicity-based group differences in public reactions shape support for restrictive immigration policies. The findings from this article belie the claim of non-prejudice and race-neutrality avowed by many opponents of immigration.