Adaptive Programming Improves Outcomes in Drug Court: An Experimental Trial

Prior studies in Drug Courts reported improved outcomes when participants were matched to schedules of judicial status hearings based on their criminological risk level. The current experiment determined whether incremental efficacy could be gained by periodically adjusting the schedule of status hearings and clinical case-management sessions in response to participants' ensuing performance in the program. The adjustments were made pursuant to a priori criteria specified in an adaptive algorithm. Results confirmed that participants in the full adaptive condition (n = 62) were more than twice as likely as those assigned to baseline-matching only (n = 63) to be drug-abstinent during the first 18 weeks of the program; however, graduation rates and the average time to case resolution were not significantly different. The positive effects of the adaptive program appear to have stemmed from holding noncompliant participants more accountable for meeting their attendance obligations in the program. Directions for future research and practice implications are discussed.     

The electoral consequences of voter ignorance

A great deal of research has suggested that scholarly and popular concerns about low levels of citizen political knowledge are exaggerated. One implication of that research is that political history would have unfolded just as it did even if electorates had been more politically informed. This paper presents evidence that counters these claims, showing an infusion of electorally relevant information in twenty-seven democracies would have likely led to a lot of vote “switching”, ultimately changing the composition of many governments. The paper also directly and systematically examines what we might call the “enlightened natural constituency” hypothesis, which expects lower-income citizens to vote disproportionately for left parties once armed with more political knowledge. While the basic argument about how political ignorance disproportionately affects the left’s natural constituency is not new, the hypothesis has thus far not been tested. The analysis provides provisional support for the hypothesis.     

Negative Advertising and the Dynamics of Candidate Support

Scholars have spent a great deal of effort examining the effects of negative advertising on citizens’ perceptions of candidates. Much of this work has used experimental designs and has produced mixed findings supporting one of two competing theories. First, negative ads may harm candidates who sponsor them because citizens tend to dislike negativity. Second, negativity may drive down citizens’ support for the targeted candidate because the attacks give people reasons to reject the target. We argue that the mixed findings produced by prior research may be driven by a disregard for campaign dynamics. We present a critical test of these two theories using data drawn from 80 statewide elections—37 gubernatorial and 43 U.S. Senate contests—from three election years and public opinion polling collected during the last 12 weeks of each campaign. We find that a candidate’s support declines as her advertising strategy includes a higher proportion of negative ads relative to her opponent and that this process unfolds slowly over the course of the campaign.