Informating policy and administration a comparative perspective on terrorism

The cliche that ‘one man's terroirist is another man' freedom fighter’ represents the major dilemma of anti-terrorism policymakers and administrators. The conceptual confusion is further complicated by the ideological orientations and policy interests of the observers. The comparative study of terrorism, however, has provided a conceptual underpinning and does provide the tools for sorting out the biases. This article compares the six principal models of political terrorism and suggests that each in fact describes a distinct form of political violence depending upon the perspective of the observer. Each of the forms of terrorism, moreover, may require a unique set of remedies. Using the widely publicized TWA bijacking during the summer of 1985 as an example, the analysis examines the differences in the American, Israeli, and Lebanese government perspectives and how those differences influenced policymaking.     

Unexpected Persistence Amidst Enlargement Stasis: Usages of Europe in Turkey’s Nuclear Energy Debate

Recent studies on European Union (EU) Enlargement have emphasised the importance of usages of ‘Europe’ by domestic actors as a necessary condition for the EU to have an impact on domestic politics. We study the usages of Europe in the critical case of Turkey’s nuclear energy policy. We analyse the narratives and actions of domestic actors in Turkey to identify if they use ‘Europe’ (the EU and the idea of Europe). We reach the counter-intuitive finding of usages by both state and non-state actors, which illustrates that usages of Europe can persist despite enlargement stasis in candidate states.     

Confirmatory Factor and Smallest Space Analyses on the Belief in a Just World Scale

Social Justice Research - A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used on the Belief in a Just World Scale (BJW; Lucas, Zhdanova & Alexander in J Individ Diff 32:14–25, 2011) to test...     

Students’ Personal Belief in a Just World,Well-Being,and Academic Cheating: A Cross-National Study

Social Justice Research - A cross-national study with university students from Germany (n?=?1135) and Turkey (n?=?634) tested whether personal belief in a just world (PBJW)...     

Examination of Hacking and Blunt Force Skeletal Trauma

Hacking trauma is prevalent in forensic cases involving genocide and dismemberment, but research into the identification of this type of trauma is lacking. The present study examines characteristics of hacking and blunt force skeletal trauma in order to determine if there is a point at which blunt force trauma becomes distinguishable from hacking trauma. Ten implements with a range of blade angles (i.e., the striking surface of the implement) were used in conjunction with a controlled-force hacking device to impact 100 limb bones of white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus). Observations of the trauma included the occurrence and degree of fragmentation, the entrance widths of the impacts, and composite scores of six hacking characteristics, especially the distinctive V-shaped kerf. ANOVA tests and regression analyses were used to assess the relationships between these characteristics and the blade angles. A significant relationship (p-value = 0.011) was found between the composite hacking scores and the blade angles, indicating that blunt force and hacking trauma can be distinguished. The entrance widths of the impacts exhibited a significant relationship with the blade angles (p-value = 0.037). There was also a significant relationship between the visibility of a V-shaped kerf in the bones (p-value = 0.003), with visibility decreasing around the 60° blade angle. These data should assist in establishing guidelines to differentiate hacking and blunt force skeletal trauma in cases where the implement is on a spectrum between sharp and blunt.