The effect of authority and social influence on eyewitness suggestibility and person recognition

This study investigated the influence of an authority figure on eyewitness identification. Participants watched a staged crime and then were administered a photo lineup by either an authority (policeman) or non-authority figure (civilian). Participants in the authority condition were more likely to choose a lineup member than those in the non-authority condition. There was no effect of authority, however, on the accuracy of the identification decisions. The lack of a deleterious effect suggests that the presence of a police officer during identification procedures does not create an unduly suggestive situation or have undesirable effects on eyewitness identification decisions. Although witnesses' choosing behaviors did not increase the rate of identification errors, the effect of the administrator's authority on choosing was reduced when unbiased instructions (vs. biased instructions) were presented to the witnesses. Thus, support was found for the use of neutral instructions during eyewitness identification procedures.     

The Virtuous Polity, The Accountable Polity: Liberty and Responsibility in The Federalist

The Federalist claims to present a republican response to thetypical political problems faced by republics. That solutionrequired a departure from all models of republics known at thattime, and in particular a break with Anti-Federalist modelsthat posited heavy reliance on responsibility, understood aseither political accountability or as moral and political virtue.The Federalist challenges the Anti-Federalist notion that a"no-gap polity" is the means to safe and effective republicanism.It also challenges those who believe that virtue of people orrulers is the precondition of a republican polity. Publius doesrequire quasi-virlues of certain sorts—and thus does notrely entirely on calculating selfinterest—but these aresignificantly different from the virtues posited by earlierrepublican theorists or certain contemporary interpreters ofThe Federalist.     

诉讼机制的社会意义

<正> 龙宗智(以下简称龙):首先需要明白的诉讼机制的特征,通俗地说,即诉讼是什么。关于这一点,法学家查比罗认为,诉讼是一种"三方组合",即发生冲突的两方要求第三方解决他们争执的活动。从这个角度讲,诉讼的基本结构就是一种"三角结构。"处于对立状态的原告、被告和居于其间、踞于其上的审判官构成诉讼结构的三个基本支点,三者互动而寻求争端的解决。具体而言,这种"三角结构"蕴含着这样几顶基本原则。一是当事人与审判官相分离,审判官不得同时兼为原告人或被告人,也不能卷入案件的利益之中,