The five‐factor model and safety in the workplace: Investigating the relationships between personality and accident involvement

Two hundred and two undergraduate participants (134 female, 68 male) completed both the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO‐PI‐R) and self‐report measures of prior workplace accident involvement. Significant inverse relationships were found between the factor of Agreeableness and the total reported number of work‐related accidents and between the factor of Conscientiousness and the total reported number of not‐at‐fault work‐related accidents alone, as well as the total reported number of work‐related accidents. Further, regression analyses indicate that both Agreeableness and Conscientiousness factors may be useful for predicting certain types of workplace accidents. Implications and potential future directions for research are discussed.     

Inter-Institutional Dynamics: Assessments of the Supreme Court in a Separation of Powers Context

Using data collected from a survey experiment, we examine whether information about the nature of the interactions between the Supreme Court and Congress influences respondents’ assessments of the Court. We find that political sophistication is key to understanding how individuals incorporate the separation of powers context into their evaluations of the Court. Political sophisticates give the Court its highest assessments when told that the Court and Congress are often in disagreement, and that Congress is most responsible for this disagreement. Assessments of the Court are significantly lower, however, when sophisticates believe that high levels of disagreement between the Court and Congress are due to the Court’s actions and when these respondents believe that the Court and Congress agree a high proportion of the time. These results suggest that for political sophisticates, the Court’s institutional standing is related to the balance it strikes between deference to Congress and judicial independence.     

Government fragmentation versus fiscal decentralization and corruption

This research examines the influence of government decentralization on corruption in the United States. Previous research has focused primarily on fiscal decentralization. We address whether the structure of local governments??measured in terms of the scope of services offered and the population served??has a bearing on corruption. Results show that government decentralization does not necessarily reduce corruption??the type of decentralization matters. Specifically, more general-purpose governments contribute to corruption. In contrast, the effect of special-purpose governments is mixed. The findings uniquely reveal the tension between fiscal decentralization and fragmented local governments in terms of impacts on corruption.     

Lebron v. Gottlieb Memorial Hospital: capping medical practice reform in Illinois

On February 4, 2010 the Illinois Supreme Court struck down Illinois' medical practice reform bill, P.A. 94-677, when it decided Lebron v. Gottlieb Memorial Hospital. Although the court only considered the unconstitutionality of the cap on non-economic damages contained in that bill, an inseverability provision resulted in the invalidation of all of its provisions. The end result of the Lebron decision extends much further than the striking of the cap on non-economic damages. It affects such areas as medical liability insurance law, physician discipline, public disclosure of information, the admissibility of physician statements into evidence, and expert witness standards. The Lebron holding has raised a significant obstacle to the implementation of a wide range of legislative measures intended to improve both the delivery and quality of healthcare services in Illinois. This article explains the impact of Lebron in these collateral, but important, areas of the law.