Talking to "Terrorists": Towards an Independent Analytical Framework for the Study of Violent Substate Activism

"Terrorism Studies" as a specific discipline is a comparatively recent addition to the social sciences and is still grappling with questions relating to a proper or appropriate methodology. This article argues that research within the field is often based neither on primary sources nor set within an independent analytical framework. Rather, it is characterized by an "aligned" position dependent on a research hermeneutic of crisis management, which perpetuates the "received view." Talking to "terrorists" and the use of social identity theory, applied in a context of cultural difference, are here proposed as a methodology enabling independent analysis.     

Influence in Terrorist Networks: From Undirected to Directed Graphs

A methodology for converting terrorist networks from undirected graphs to simplified directed graphs (or digraphs), and mapping the flow of influence in them, is described. It is based on an “influence assumption”—that important persons with more links influence less important persons with fewer links. This methodology, which was previously used to analyze the structure of influence relationships in Communist-bloc countries and the international system, is illustrated by its application to two terrorist networks constructed after 9/11. In the second more complex network, the hierarchy sheds light on the leadership and likely terrorist cells embedded in the network. Refined data and alternative assumptions about influence could provide additional insights into the structure of terrorist networks.     

Court fees and access to justice: towards a policy-oriented approach in Malawi

In this article, the author examines the rise in court fees which has been decided in Malawi. The author argues that this increase is excessive and contravenes the constitutional right of access to justice, as poor litigants cannot afford the fees and thereby cannot access the justice system. In his analysis, the author suggests that the decision-makers in Malawi should adopt a policy-oriented approach in reviewing court fees in order to protect citizens’ rights and achieve equality.     

Majority Party Power and Procedural Motions in the U.S. Senate

While the metaphor of House parties as cartels is widely accepted, its application to the Senate is difficult as the majority party lacks the power to unilaterally manipulate rules and pass legislation. Nevertheless, several scholars have argued that the Senate majority party is able to employ nondebatable motions to table to exclude unwanted amendments with procedural rather than substantive votes. Does the motion to table yield negative agenda control or special party influence? Using an analysis of individual Senators' behavior on thousands of votes and an assessment of interest group scores, we find that motions to table do not elicit higher party influence or provide much political cover. A desire to speed up the legislative process, rather than to insulate members from electoral scrutiny, seems to motivate the use of motions to table.     

Fathers’ patenting behavior and the propensity of offspring to patent: an intergenerational analysis

In this paper we show that the patenting behavior of innovators is correlated with the patenting behavior of their fathers. Our argument for exploring this relationship stems from established theories of entrepreneurial behavior, specifically theories on intergenerational behavior. Our empirical analyses are based on survey data collected from MIT’s Technology Review (TR) winners.     

Perceived Legitimacy of Judicial Authorities in Relation to Degree of Value Discrepancy with Public Citizens

In this study of perceived legitimacy, Australian citizens from a randomly selected national sample first responded to information about how judicial authorities responded to two crimes (green protest, date rape) in terms of seriousness and recommended punishment. They also provided ratings of the importance of a set of values for judicial authorities compared with self, and measures of global value discrepancy, procedural fairness, expertise, and legitimacy. Results showed that perceived legitimacy was negatively related to global value discrepancy and that the information provided to participants about judge’s position primed differences in value discrepancy only for the date rape crime. Other findings also implied that the nature of the offense moderated legitimacy/value discrepancy relations. Perceived legitimacy was also positively related to procedural fairness and the expertise of the authority, and higher when the judicial authority was perceived to assign specific values as even more important than participants did themselves.     

Pitfalls in the Use of Time Series Methods to Study Deterrence and Capital Punishment

Objectives

Evaluate the use of various time series methods to measure the deterrence effect of capital punishment.

Methods

The analysis of the time series approach to deterrence is conducted at two levels. First, the mathematical foundations of time series methods are described and the link between the time series properties of aggregate homicide and execution series and individual decision making is developed. Second, individual studies are examined for logical consistency.

Results

The analysis concludes that time series methods used to study the deterrence effects of capital punishment suffer from fundamental limitations and fail to provide credible evidence. The common limitation of these studies is their lack of attention to identification problems. Suggestions are made as to directions for future work that may be able to mitigate the weaknesses of the current literature.

Conclusions

Time series studies of capital punishment suffer from sufficiently serious identification problems that existing empirical findings are compatible with either the presence or the absence of a deterrent effect.     

What Do Panel Studies Tell Us About a Deterrent Effect of Capital Punishment? A Critique of the Literature

Objectives

We provide a critical review of empirical research on the deterrent effect of capital punishment that makes use of state and, in some instances, county-level, panel data.

Methods

We present the underlying behavioral model that presumably informs the specification of panel data regressions, outline the typical model specification employed, discuss current norms regarding “best-practice” in the analysis of panel data, and engage in a critical review.

Results

The connection between the theoretical reasoning underlying general deterrence and the regression models typically specified in this literature is tenuous. Many of the papers purporting to find strong effects of the death penalty on state-level murder rates suffer from basic methodological problems: weak instruments, questionable exclusion restrictions, failure to control for obvious factors, and incorrect calculation of standard errors which in turn has led to faulty statistical inference. The lack of variation in the key underlying explanatory variables and the heavy influence exerted by a few observations in state panel data regressions is a fundamental problem for all panel data studies of this question, leading to overwhelming model uncertainty.

Conclusions

We find the recent panel literature on whether there is a deterrent effect of the death penalty to be inconclusive as a whole, and in many cases uninformative. Moreover, we do not see additional methodological tools that are likely to overcome the multiple challenges that face researchers in this domain, including the weak informativeness of the data, a lack of theory on the mechanisms involved, and the likely presence of unobserved confounders.