Consumerism and the new poor

He is author of Applied Mathematical Demography; Population Change and Social Policy;and co-author (with Wilhelm Flieger) of World Populations: An Analysis of Vital Data.     

So You Love Me

This essay uses the work of Gilles Deleuze, in some detail, to argue for a new practice of criticism. Not in order to purify, refine, or generally redeem anything, but rather to encourage a focusing upon the production of fields of experience as an ethical event. As such, the piece re-problematizes what it means to raise questions, and demonstrates the underlying responsibility of doing so.     

Civilizations Out of Sync

Efforts by the Bush Administration to launch an international public relations campaign — under the guidance of the marketing guru behind the Uncle ben' rice advertisements — is a bit naive. "If the Muslim world only understood our good intentions, all would be ok," seems to be the idea. And Hollywood has been enlisted to tell the world, "This is not a war against Muslims."     

The information gained from witnesses' responses to an initial "blank" lineup

Wells ("The psychology of lineup identifications," Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 1984, 14, 89-103) proposed that a blank lineup (an initial lineup of known-to-be-innocent foils) can be used to screen eyewitnesses; witnesses who chose from a blank lineup (initial choosers) were more likely to make an error on a second lineup that contained a suspect than were witnesses who rejected a blank lineup (initial nonchoosers). Recent technological advances (e.g., computer-administered lineups) may overcome many of the practical difficulties cited as a barrier to the use of blank lineups. Our research extended knowledge about the blank lineup procedure by investigating the underlying causes of the difference in identification performance between initial choosers and initial nonchoosers. Studies 1a and 1b (total, N = 303) demonstrated that initial choosers were more likely to reject a second lineup than initial nonchoosers and witnesses who did not view a blank lineup, implying that cognitive biases (e.g., confirmation bias and commitment effects) influenced initial choosers' identification decisions. In Study 2 (N = 200), responses on a forced-choice identification test provided evidence that initial choosers have, on average, poorer memories for the culprit than do initial nonchoosers. We also investigated the usefulness of blank lineups for interpreting identification evidence. Diagnosticity ratios suggested that suspect identifications made by initial nonchoosers (cf. initial choosers) should have a greater impact on estimates of the likely guilt of the suspect. Furthermore, for initial nonchoosers, higher confidence in blank lineup rejections was associated with higher diagnosticity for subsequent suspect identifications. These results have implications for policy to guide the collection and interpretation of identification evidence. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved).     

Trait Anger,Physical Aggression,and Violent Offending in Antisocial and Borderline Personality Disorders

Antisocial personality disorder (ASPD) and borderline personality disorder (BPD) are common conditions in forensic settings that present high rates of violence. Personality traits related to the five‐factor model personality domains of neuroticism and agreeableness have shown a relationship with physical aggression in nonclinical and general psychiatric samples. The aim of the present investigation was to examine the association of these personality traits with violence and aggression in ASPD and BPD. Results revealed that trait anger/hostility predicted self‐reported physical aggression in 47 ASPD and BPD subjects (β = 0.5, p = 0.03) and number of violent convictions in a subsample of the ASPD participants (β = 0.2, p = 0.009). These preliminary results suggest that high anger and hostility are associated with physical aggression in BPD and ASPD. Application of validated, self‐report personality measures could provide useful and easily accessible information to supplement clinical risk assessment of violence in these conditions.     

Buying Negative Agenda Control in the U.S. House

We explore the foundations of the legislative party cartel, as theorized by Cox and McCubbins (1993, 2005) , to determine how majority‐party moderates who suffer net policy losses from the majority leadership's use of negative agenda control are kept from defecting from the cartel arrangement. First, we identify formally the group of majority‐party members who are net policy losers. We find that those members occupying the initial 30% of the space within the majority‐party blockout zone—that space closest to the floor median—are hurt on a pure policy basis by the cartel arrangement. Second, we find that members in this “30% zone” are rewarded disproportionately by majority‐party leaders (relative to members in other intervals on the same side of the floor median) via side payments in the form of campaign contributions. In addition, majority‐party members within the 30% zone receive side payments commensurate with their particular policy loss.