I’m Watching You: Cyberstalking Behaviors of University Students in Romantic Relationships

As technology has become an ever-present facet in the lives of young people, they have become reliant on it to form and maintain relationships. It has also helped facilitate negative relationship behaviors, such as the monitoring of romantic partners without their permission (aka cyberstalking). The purpose of this study is to investigate theoretical predictors of cyberstalking in a sample of university students by applying General Theory of Crime and Social Learning Theory. Results indicated that low selfcontrol and deviant peer association are significant predictors of cyberstalking, specifically attempting to log-in to a person’s social media, as well as social media presence and sex.     

Qualified to Learn the Job: Donna Shalala

This profile of Donna Shalala illustrates how it is possible to craft a career that moves along quite untraditional paths. Shalala was a political appointee who adopted characteristics that are usually associated with career public servants. Shalala's approach to career development can be useful to others who are thinking about a career development strategy. She did not ask whether she was qualified for a job but whether she was qualified to learn the job. At the same time, it is clear that she was able to apply experiences and lessons from diverse settings to new positions. Her career has been characterized not only by an in-and-out pattern but also by diversity within each of those settings. Her career pattern shows how Shalala was able to reinforce her personal strengths of being a problem solver and respond to unpredictable opportunities.     

Partisans in Robes: Party Cues and Public Acceptance of Supreme Court Decisions

The public perceives the Supreme Court to be a legal institution. This perception enables the Court's legitimacy‐conferring function, which serves to increase public acceptance of its decisions. Yet, the public acknowledges a political aspect to the Court as well. To evaluate how the public responds to the different images of the Supreme Court, we investigate whether and how depictions of specifically partisan (e.g., Republican) Court rulings shape public acceptance of its decisions while varying institutional, legal, and issue characteristics. Using survey experiments, we find that party cues and partisanship, more so than the imprimatur of the Court, affect public acceptance. We also find that polarization diminishes the effect of party cues. Attributing a decision to the Court does little to increase baseline acceptance or attenuate partisan cue effects. The Court's uniqueness, at least in terms of its legitimacy‐conferring function, is perhaps overstated.