Free press and fair trial: The role of behavioral research

The growth of mass media has complicated the relatioship between the courts and the media. Free press and fair trial rights are kept in balance by the use of judicial restraints and remedies such asvoir dire, change of venue, and gag orders. This balance has shifted back and forth during the past two decades. Current case law and legal codes are inconsistent and provide insufficient guidance to judges in their use of restraints and remedies. Nor is there a body of empirical research on the impact of news coverage and juror behavior capable of informing the courts at this time. In this paper, we review and critically assess the empirical social science literature as it pertains to the legal issues involving free press and fair trial. We argue that carefully conducted empirical research could provide important information to the courts. We suggest research directions and methodological caveats to increase legal relevance and scientific validity.     

Two models of the urban crisis: An analytical essay on banfield and forrester

This essay examines the arguments and evidence used in two recent models of the urban crisis—Edward C. Banfield'sThe Unheavenly City and Jay W. Forrester'sUrban Dynamics. Although Banfield's model is sociological and Forrester's is economic and physical, both imply that not much can be done to alleviate urban problems and that positive programs may make them worse. The authors of this critique contend that the articulation of argument and evidence is inadequate to support the implication. They advocate that promising current programs be refined on the basis of evidence and experience and that policymakers continue to search for efficient new programs through social experiments.     

Allocations among programs having counteractive outcomes

Difficulties have been encountered in attempting to apply benefit-cost analysis to the problem of determining resource allocations among social programs, especially when there are multiple outcomes associated with each of the programs. Further complications result when program outcomes are characterized as counteractive: a specific allocation of resources to a program is likely to achieve a favorable impact regarding certain objectives while that allocation is also likely to have an unfavorable impact regarding other objectives. A model which promises to be useful in determining optimal resource allocations among programs having counteractive outcomes is presented. Two steps are required for the use of the model: (1) values, reflecting priorities, need to be assigned to the various objectives that programs are intended to accomplish and (2) an ensemble of probabilistic functions relating resources to program outcomes needs to be specified and combined to reflect the value of an ensemble of programs. In addition to determining optimal resource allocations, the model provides insights into the consequences of resource decisions based on noneconomic considerations. An example illustrates the major features of the model.