Compromise formation in social conflicts: The influence of age,issue, and interpersonal context

Adolescents' understanding of societal conflict and of compromise resolution in the context of peer and authority relations was investigated. Six conflict stories were prepared for three social issues. Each issue included two similar stories that were counterbalanced for presentation in peer or authority context. The adolescents—ages 11, 13, 15, and 17—were asked to develop dialogues by continuing conversations from the stories with the aim of resolving the conflict. Responses were categorized on a 3-point scale: (1) noncompromise, (2) routine compromise, and (3) constructive compromise. In addition, one moral and one political dilemma were presented in order to relate conflict resolution to moral and political development. The major findings were an increase in frequency of constructive compromise with age and in peer vs authority context. Further, both moral and political development were significantly related to conflict resolution scores in peer but not in authority context. Results corroborate an interpretation that considers peer communicative relations of mutual respect and cooperation as a primary path to mature stages of social reasoning.Received Ph.D. in 1986 from Catholic University of America. Research interests include conflict resolution, adolescent sexuality, and substance abuse.Received Ph.D. in 1960 from Portland University. Research interests include Development of knowledge.     

The Supreme Court Prohibits Gerrymandering: A Gain or a Loss for the States?

The 1986 Davis v. Bandemer decision of the U.S. Supreme Courtdeclared partisan gerrymandering to be justiciable, but overruledthe federal district court's judgment that the Indiana legislativeredistricting plan was unconstitutional. The Court split onthe question of justiciability, and those justices who favoredjusticiability disagreed on the appropriate tests to apply intesting a districting plan for unfair partisan gerrymandering.The Court did not specify a clear measure and standard for outlawinggerrymandering. This gives state districting authorities anddistrict courts little guidance in dealing with gerrymandering.If, however, a successful measure and standard are developed,this action is likely to be beneficial to the states.     

THE ANALYSIS OF DESIGN OR THE DESIGN OF ANALYSIS?

The policy sciences have advanced in the past by introspection, and there appears to be a need for a return to such self-conscious examination of the field of inquiry. A design orientation offers a useful framework for such an examination. It requires reconsideration of some of the fundamental premises of policy inquiry. This article explores what impact design might have on the conventional process framework and then proceeds to discuss the development of a design perspective.