眼外伤分度及其法医学鉴定

在现行的人体损伤程度鉴定标准和道路交通事故伤残评定标准中都有许多涉及眼损伤分度的问题。但由于标准本身缺乏相应的评定细则,给鉴定工作带来诸多困难。同样的损伤可能因鉴定人对标准的理解和掌握存在分歧而导致同一损伤会出现不同的鉴定结果。本文借鉴临床医学分度原则,对眼外伤损伤程度和伤残鉴定中所存在的问题提出具体的适用原则,旨在使鉴定工作更加标准化和规范化。     

我国医疗事故罪的医疗过失问题探讨

目前学界对医疗过失的认定见解不一。本文从医务人员的注意能力和注意义务阐述医疗事故罪的主观方面问题,注意义务包括预见义务和结果避免义务,注意能力的认定采用的是主客观相统一,以客观标准为主兼顾主观标准。同时,对医疗实践中争议很大的尖端医疗中的医疗过失应当具体问题具体分析。     

基于个体心理视角下的网络谣言规律研究

谣言几乎与人类历史同龄。近年来,随着互联网的普及以及社会文化的变迁,网络谣言变得随处可见。而随着网络谣言的蔓延,社会的稳定也在不断受到影响。从心理学角度来看,网络谣言的产生和传播是由多种心理因素共同而形成的结果。掌握网络谣言的产生与发展所蕴含的心理因素,对于我们有效辨别谣言、控制舆论、维护社会稳定有着重要意义。     

互联网时代的“民意病毒”与司法公信力的树立

互联网颠覆性地开创了一个时代。互联网民意在敏感案件中异化为"民意病毒",其干预司法的现象日益突出。针对互联网传播的特点,司法机关若想引导民意,克服"民意病毒"的蔓延,就要设立网络交互机制,发挥自由裁量权并重视群众朴素的正义感,加快推进法官职业化和司法独立,指引公民建立法律信仰,树立司法公信力。     

Backing Out or Backing In? Commitment and Consistency in Audience Costs Theory

Audience costs theory posits that domestic publics punish leaders for making an external threat and then backing down. One key mechanism driving this punishment involves the value the public places on consistency between their leaders’ statements and actions. If true, this mechanism should operate not only when leaders fail to implement threats, but also when they fail to honor promises to stay out of a conflict. We use a survey experiment to examine domestic responses to the president's decision to “back down” from public threats and “back into” foreign conflicts. We find the president loses support in both cases, but suffers more for “backing out” than “backing in.” These differential consequences are partially explained by asymmetries in the public's treatment of new information. Our findings strongly suggest that concerns over consistency undergird audience costs theory and that punishment for inconsistency will be incurred, regardless of the leader's initial policy course.     

Citizen support for European Union membership: the role of socialisation experiences

The article explores whether European Union membership has a socialisation effect on citizens’ attitudes towards their country’s membership of the EU. Using a sample of 15 Western European countries, it is shown that this is the case. First, evidence is provided of a positive lifelong socialisation effect: citizen support for their country’s membership of the EU increases with years spent living in an EU member state. Second, it is shown that those who joined the EU during their formative years are less supportive of the EU, whilst those who spent their formative years in a non-democracy are more positive about EU membership. The size of these effects is very small in comparison to that found for the lifelong socialisation effect, suggesting that the lifelong socialisation process of continued EU membership is much more important for EU attitudes. This study offers new insights into the formation of EU attitudes.     

从舆论监督到新闻法治——基于当代传媒与司法的关系研究

新闻自由与司法公正都是民主与法治的基本要求，是人类所追求的价值目标。但必须意识到舆论监督权的过度扩张，往往形成民众的激情与压力，影响到独立、理性的司法裁判和司法公正。如何权衡两者之间的矛盾与冲突成为摆在我们面前的一个时代主题。在借鉴国际规则和国外经验的基础上，结合我国司法与传媒的现状，新闻法治应是当前化解传媒与司法困境的可选择之路。     

Detecting manipulation in authoritarian elections: Survey-based methods in Zimbabwe

This paper explores the feasibility of using social surveys to detect electoral manipulation in authoritarian regimes. It compares official results from the July 2013 elections in Zimbabwe with findings from a nationally representative pre-election survey. The comparison confirms that the dominant incumbent party won the elections but by far smaller margins than officially reported. This discrepancy provides analytic leverage to identify the possible presence of coercive mobilization and vote suppression and to pinpoint their geographic location. The election results are re-estimated using a set of voting simulations based on novel proxy indicators and an original list experiment designed to reveal the political preferences of fearful voters. The paper concludes by discussing why autocrats manipulate elections and whether or not they succeed in their objectives.     

Stakeholder governance of organ transplantation: A desirable model for inducing evidence-based medicine?

Medical governance should secure and apply appropriate expertise, accommodate stakeholder interests, and promote social values. The most common form of governance, public (agency) rulemaking by government agencies, usually involves supplementing in-house expertise through advisory committees. An alternative, private (stakeholder) rulemaking, involves delegating the authority for developing rules directly to stakeholders, who often command relevant expertise, including that arising out of tacit knowledge. The possible advantages and disadvantages of agency and stakeholder rulemaking in medical governance can be assessed both from what we know about these forms in general and from experience with a prominent example of stakeholder rulemaking; that is, governance of the US organ transplantation system. It appears that this governance has been exceptionally successful in promoting evidence-based medicine. The stakeholder role in the governance of transplantation could be replicated in other areas by creating meaningful stakes to engage stakeholders and by increasing isolation from legislative politics through an independent funding source and circumscribed oversight.