From weakest-link to best-shot: The voluntary provision of public goods

It has traditionally been assumed that the socially available amount X of a public good is the simple sum of the separate amounts x _i produced by the i = 1, ..., I members of the community. But there are many other possibilities of practical importance. Among them are: (i) Weakest-link rule, where the socially available amount is the minimum of the quantities individually provided, and (ii) Best-shot rule, where the socially available amount is the maximum of the individual quantities. The former tends to arise in linear situations, where each individual has a veto on the total to be provided (e.g., if each is responsible for one link of a chain); the latter tends to arise when there is a single prize of overwhelming importance for the community, with any individual's effort having a chance of securing the prize. In comparison with the standard Summation formula of ordinary public-good theory, it is shown that underprovision of the public good tends to considerably moderated when the Weakest-link function is applicable, but aggravated when the Best-shot function is applicable. In time of disaster, where the survival of the community may depend upon each person's doing his duty, the conditions for applicability of the Weakest-link rule are approximated. This circumstance explains the historical observation that disaster conditions tend to elicit an extraordinary amount of unselfish behavior.     

Simple Bayesian Inference for Qualitative Political Research

In political science and related disciplines in the social andbehavioral sciences, there exists an unfortunate de facto dividebetween qualitative and quantitative empirical research. Sometimesthis divide is purely a function of training and disciplinarysocialization, but often it reflects a valid dispute over thephilosophical foundations of inquiry. I argue here that theBayesian approach to quantitative empirical modeling is an amenablestarting point for building a rapprochement between qualitativeand quantitative research, and I introduce as an example a straightforwardmodel that allows for the Bayesian estimation of the differencebetween means of very small samples with unknown and possiblyunequal variances. I then extend this approach to consider nonnormalvariates, informative priors, and a multivariate test of thedifference of means useful for the researcher who is interestedin determining whether two small samples are different on severaldimensions simultaneously.     

Weight force during prone restraint and respiratory function

Prone maximal restraint position (PMRP, also known as hogtie or hobble) is often used by law enforcement and prehospital personnel on violent combative individuals in the field setting. Weight force is often applied to the restrained individual's back and torso during the restraint process. We sought to determine the effect of 25 and 50 lbs weight force on respiratory function in human subject volunteers placed in the PMRP. We performed a randomized, cross-over, controlled trial on 10 subjects placed in 4 positions for 5 minutes each: sitting, PRMP, PRMP with 25 lbs weight force (PMRP+25), and PRMP with 50 lbs weight force placed on the back (PMRP+50). We measure pulse oximetry, end-tidal CO2 levels, and forced vital capacity (FVC) and forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1). FVC and FEV1 were significantly lower in all restraint positions compared with sitting but not significantly different between restraint positions with and without weight force. Moreover, mean oxygen saturation levels were above 95% and mean end-tidal CO2 levels were below 45 mm Hg for all positions. We conclude that PMRP with and without 25 and 50 lbs of weight force resulted in a restrictive pulmonary function pattern but no evidence of hypoxia or hypoventilation.     

The U.S. and third World Revolutionary States: Understanding the Breakdown in Relations

Although scholars focused on Soviet–American relations during the Cold War, the greatest number of conflicts for the U.S. occurred in the Third World, and most of these were with revolutionary states. Could U.S. policies toward the new revolutionary states have prevented the almost universal collapse in relations? Two dominant explanations for this breakdown are (1) American hostility toward revolutionary change and (2) Stephen Walt's variant of the spiral model. Using the comparative case approach and selecting "hard cases," this article disputes these explanations and offers a new theory based on the externalization of domestic conflict in the revolutionary states. Given their ideological goals, the radicals externalized their domestic conflicts with the moderates, who had transnational ties with the U.S., by fomenting tensions with Washington. To demonstrate that this theory can be generalized, this article varies the dependent variable and shows through a critical case that its lack of conflict can best be explained by the absence of the conditions that lead to externalization. The foreign policies of both the U.S. and revolutionary states are explained by classical realism as opposed to Walt's structural realism, which fails to account for the foreign policies of Third World states.     

Socially responsible Criminology: Quality relevant research with targeted,effective dissemination

This address argues that some members of the criminology community must take upon themselves the responsibility of communicating the knowledge developed by the field to practitioners and decision makers. It is reasoned that only with such targeted dissemination will the full potential benefits from our work be realized.