Reconsidering individual-level heterogeneity in economic voting

This paper proposes a general theory of individual-level heterogeneity in economic voting based on the perspective that the strength of the relationship varies with factors that influence the relevance of the economic evaluation to the vote choice. We posit that the electoral relevance of the economic evaluation increases with the strength of partisanship as well as political sophistication. Given the strong correlation between partisanship and sophistication, this theoretical perspective casts doubt on extant evidence that more sophisticated voters are more likely to hold the incumbent party electorally accountable for macroeconomic performance since this result might be an artifact of failing to control for the economic evaluation being more relevant to the vote choice of stronger partisans. Our statistical investigation of this question finds no significant evidence that sophistication conditions the economic voting relationship once the conditioning effect of partisanship is included in the model. This finding suggests that individual-level heterogeneity in the strength of the economic voting relationship is largely due to stronger partisans voting more consistently with their national economic evaluation than to more sophisticated voters being more policy-oriented by holding the incumbent party more electorally accountable for macroeconomic performance.     

The lore of sexual difference in social and legal discourse on ‘date rape’

Using a framework informed by Foucauldian discourse theory and feminist accounts of sexual difference, this paper investigates the process of attrition in cases initially recorded as rape and in which complainant and suspect are known to each other. Having particular regard to police and prosecutor decision-making in the processing of such cases, the authors consider discourses that utilise conceptions of sexual difference, which work to normalise and privilege cultural assumptions about male desires and conduct in sexual relations. In illuminating the manner in which the traditional binary categories of sexual difference is put to work, the authors argue that socio-legal debates over the phenomenon commonly described as ‘date rape’ have over-simplistically inverted these categories. The authors further argue that this inversion operates to women's detriment and fails to advance a sufficiently nuanced understanding of complex issues implicated in rapes committed against women by men they know. This revised version was published online in November 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

The probative character of Forensic Handwriting Examiners’ identification and elimination opinions on questioned signatures

This 5-year study investigated the character of Forensic Handwriting Examiners’ (FHEs) authorship opinions on questioned signatures through the medium of blind validation trials. Twenty-nine thousand eight hundred and eleven authorship opinions were expressed by FHEs on trial kits comprising randomized questioned genuine signatures (written by the specimen writer), disguised signatures (written by the specimen writer) and simulated signatures (not written by the specimen writer). Results showed that, as a group, FHEs were significantly more confident at identifying writers’ genuine signatures than identifying writers’ disguised signatures or eliminating specimen writers from having authored simulated signatures. It is proposed that the difference in FHE confidence arises from the difficulty they have in deciding which alternative authorship explanation accounts for perceived combinations of similar and dissimilar features between specimen and questioned signatures.