Administration in a small capitalist state: The Hong Kong experience

This article is primarily concerned with the functions of bureaucracy in a minimal state and with how those functions might change in response to economic growth. It is predicated on the assumption that bureaucracy is necessary for economic growth even in those countries which seek to achieve such growth through the relatively free operation of the economy within the rubric of a capitalist state. Hong Kong is a case in point. Although it has often been taken as the epitome of the benefits which can be derived from keeping government out of the economy, the bureaucracy has in fact played a critical role in support of economic development. Aside from the functions which must be performed by any state, such as the maintenance of law and order, the administration of justice, and the provision of public works, three features of Hong Kong bureaucratic practice appear to have been important in the definition of the bureaucracy's tasks in the economic growth process. These are ‘value for money’ and the constant need to justify government expenditure; effective line implementation; and the ability to manage crises. If these constitute minimal essential requirements for such governments, they may provide useful criteria which small or micro-states, following capital growth models but not yet experiencing rapid economic development, can apply in assessing the capabilities of their own bureaucracies.     

Alcohol and Violence Related Cognitive Risk Factors Associated with the Perpetration of Intimate Partner Violence

The primary aim of this study is to determine the association between alcohol, violence related cognitive risk factors, and impulsivity with the perpetration of partner violence among current drinkers. A probability sample (n = 1468) of White, Black, and Hispanic couples 18 years of age or older in the United States household population was interviewed in 1995 with a response rate of 85%. The risk factors of interest included the alcohol and violence related cognitions of approval of marital aggression, alcohol as an excuse for misbehavior, and aggressive expectations following alcohol consumption as well as impulsivity. In all, 15% (216/1468) of the respondents reported perpetration of domestic violence. In addition, 24% (7/29) of those who approved of marital violence, 11% (126/1163) of those who reported alcohol use as an excuse for misbehavior, 10% (128/1257) of those who reported aggressive expectations following alcohol consumption, and 14% (99/716) of those who reported impulsivity also reported perpetration of domestic violence. Bivariate analysis indicated that all of the cognitive risk factors were significantly more common in those who reported perpetration of intimate partner violence (IPV) (p < 0.05). However, multivariate analysis controlling for ethnicity, education, income, age, gender, and impulsivity indicated that those who reported strong or very strong expectations of aggressive behavior following alcohol consumption were 3.2 (95% CI = 1.3–7.9) times more likely to perpetrate IPV. Although all of the alcohol and violence related cognitive risk factors were associated with the perpetration of domestic violence, expectations of aggressive behavior following alcohol consumption appeared to be the strongest predictor of the perpetration of IPV among current drinkers. Therefore, alcohol expectancy may be an important factor to assess when attempting to identify and treat perpetrators of domestic violence who are also current drinkers.     

A CRITICAL EXAMINATION OF THE SUITABILITY AND LIMITATIONS OF PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTS IN FAMILY COURT

Psychologists are frequently consulted by the courts to provide forensic evaluations in a variety of family court proceedings. As part of their evaluations, psychologists often use psychological tests to assess parents, guardians, and children. These tests can have profound effects on how psychologists arrive at their opinions and are often cited in their reports to the court. However, psychological tests vary substantially in their suitability for these purposes. Most projective tests in particular appear to possess little scientific merit for evaluations within family court proceedings. Despite these serious limitations, expert testimony derived from evaluations using both projective and objective tests is often admitted uncontested. This article reviews the psychometric properties of psychological tests that are widely used in family court proceedings, cautions against their unfettered use, and calls upon attorneys to inform themselves of the limitations of evaluations that incorporate these tests.