Self-esteem in early adolescence: The identification and prediction of contrasting longitudinal trajectories

The present study focused on differences in self-esteem trajectory in early adolescence rather than on average change across all children. Longitudinal data from 128 adolescents were obtained over a 2-year period that encompassed the transition from elementary school to junior high school. Cluster analysis revealed four markedly divergent self-esteem trajectories: consistently high (35%), chronically low (13%), steeply declining (21%), and small increase (31%). Attempts to predict trajectories were only partially successful. Peer social support was the strongest predictor, but its relation to self-esteem appears more circumscribed than had been thought. The discussion considers differences in the experience of early adolescence, as well as implications for the design and evaluation of preventive intervention.Funding for this research was provided via awards to Barton J. Hirsch from the National Institute of Mental health (New Investigator Research Award in Prevention), the University of Illinois Research Board, and the Northwestern University Research Grants Committee. Abbreviated versions of this article were presented at the meetings of the Society for Research on Adolescence, Alexandria, Virginia, March 1988, and the Society for Research in Child Development, Kansas City, April 1989. We are grateful to Joyce Epstein for her comments on an earlier draft.Received Ph.D. in clinical psychology from the University of Oregon. Research interests include community psychology, ecology of adolescent development, social networks, and social policy.Research interests include peer relations and school-based preventive intervention.     

Proportionality in the philosophy of punishment: From “why punish?” to “how much?”

This article is a substantially revised version of a paper originally prepared for the International Conference on Justice in Punishment, Jerusalem, Israel, March 27–31, 1988.     

On the Legitimate Objectives of Criminalisation

We discuss and respond to the contributions of Tatjana Hörnle, John Kleinig, and John Stanton-Ife, and clarify some aspects of the arguments made in Crimes, Harms, and Wrongs.     

Signaling and Counter‐Signaling in the Judicial Hierarchy: An Empirical Analysis of En Banc Review

We leverage the institutional features of American courts to evaluate the importance of whistleblowers in hierarchical oversight. Drawing on a formal theory of signaling in the judicial hierarchy, we examine the role of whistleblowing dissents in triggering en banc review of three‐judge panels by full circuits of the Courts of Appeals. The theory generates predictions about how dissent interacts with judicial preferences to influence circuits' review and reversal decisions, which we test using original and existing data. First, we show that judges who dissent counter to their preferences are more likely to see their dissents lead to review and reversal. Second, we show that dissents are most influential when the likelihood of non‐compliance by a three‐judge panel is highest. Our results underscore the importance of dissent in the judicial hierarchy and illustrate how judicial whistleblowers can help appellate courts target the most important cases for review.