Property Crime Victims' Decision to Notify the Police: Social,Cognitive, and Affective Determinants

Previous research suggests that 3 general processes underlie the decision of property crime victims to notify the police: One that is cognitively driven by reward/cost considerations, one that is affectively driven, and another that is socially driven. This study is the first to employ a community sample of crime victims to compare the 3 processes within a single study. Computer-assisted interviews were conducted with 422 property crime victims (n = 129 burglary, n = 293 theft) located via a random digit dialing procedure. Logistic regression analyses showed that each process independently accounted for a significant amount of the variance in victim reporting, and that there were no interactions among the three processes in predicting reporting. Of the 3 processes, social influence was the best predictor of reporting. Analysis of the affect-driven process showed that reporting was primarily a function of the level of fear rather than anger or the level of generalized arousal upon discovering the crime.     

Emotion and the Law: A Framework for Inquiry

This paper draws on research in social and cognitive psychology to show how theories of judgment and decision making that incorporate decision makers' affective responses apply to legal contexts. It takes 2 widely used models of decision making, the rational actor and lens models, and illustrates their utility for understanding legal judgments by using them to interpret research findings on juror decision making, people's obedience to the law (e.g., paying taxes), and eyewitness memory. The paper concludes with a discussion of the advantages of modifying existing approaches to information processing to include the influence of affect on how legal actors reach judgments about law and legal process.     

Do Juries Meet Our Expectations?

Surveys of public opinion indicate that people have high expectations for juries. When it comes to serious crimes, most people want errors of convicting the innocent (false positives) or acquitting the guilty (false negatives) to fall well below 10%. Using expected utility theory, Bayes' Theorem, signal detection theory, and empirical evidence from detection studies of medical decision making, eyewitness testimony, and weather forecasting, we argue that the frequency of mistakes probably far exceeds these tolerable levels. We are not arguing against the use of juries. Rather, we point out that a closer look at jury decisions reveals a serious gap between what we expect from juries and what probably occurs. When deciding issues of guilt and/or punishing convicted criminals, we as a society should recognize and acknowledge the abundance of error.     

Just as you like it: How allocators decide in cases of conflict between own and recipients' views of justice

The present study examined how people, who are instructed to make just allocations, decide in situations of conflict when their personal views of what constitutes the appropriate justice standard are partly at variance with the opinions and preferences of the recipients of the allocations. We expected, in line with recent theories, which stress that justice behavior is at least partly motivated by the desire to get one's actions accepted and approved, the allocation decisions to be influenced not only by the allocators' own ideas of what constitutes a just solution but also by the preferences they perceive to exist for the recipients. It was predicted that the likelihood that allocators will abandon their personally preferred justice standards and allocate in accordance to recipients' preferences will increase with increasing numbers of cues suggesting an alternative allocation. Subjects having a strong personal preference for the equality over the equity standard of justice were asked to make just allocations of payments among two workers. Availability vs. lack of explicit information about the recipients' allocation preferences and expectation of future interaction with one of the recipients were used to operationalize differing amounts of pressure exerted on the allocators' decisions. Results showed a considerable readiness on the part of the allocators to abandon their own views of justice, the amount of readiness varying with the amount of pressure that was weighing upon them.     

决策科学化民主化的成功典型——“禄钢”改制为“德钢”决策过程分析

正确决策是各项工作成功的重要前提.楚雄州"禄钢"改制为"德纲"的成功实践,为云南省深化国有企业改革提供了有益的借鉴,是决策科学化、民主化的成功典型.     

浅析新儒学的法律观及对律学的影响

两汉基于政治的稳定,经济的恢复和发展,汉武帝的个人才智和个性以及儒学自身发展的逻辑轨迹,确立了以新儒学为核心的封建正统法律思想。该思想以其独特的“天人感应”、“三纲五常”、“德主刑辅”、《春秋》决狱、秋冬行刑等理论原则影响着中国封建法制建设,在中国法制史上占据两千多年的统治地位。     

政府治理理念重塑基础上的“新公共预算决策”

本文从新时期我国政府治理理念重塑的必要性入手,对政府治理理念重塑 的内涵"以公众为中心,以结果为导向,以市场为基础"做了较为深入的阐述,在此基础之 上,运用公共预算决策的一般性分析框架,从权力、信息、决策模式出发,建构了"新公共预 算决策"这一全新的理念。     

The ‘New Right' Vote: An Analysis of the Gender Gap in the Vote Choice for the SVP

Studying the Swiss national elections 2003, we find a pronounced gender gap in the SVP vote ‐ women are significantly less likely to vote for this party than are men. In order to explain this gender gap, this article combines two innovative approaches. On the one hand, it links the literature on gender gaps with research on the New Right. On the other, it makes a distinction between the conditional and compositional effects of explanatory factors. Our analysis reveals that conditional effects are of greater relevance than compositional ones. Explanatory factors regularly applied in research on the New Right have a conditional effect inasmuch as they only have an effect on male voters, but cannot explain the behaviour of women. This, in turn, also highlights the importance of a gender‐specific focus for further research.     

试论侦查决策中的思维方法

侦查决策作为一种重要的思维活动或认识活动,与侦查人员的思维方法具有内在的、不可分割的联系。从侦查决策实践来看,思维方法主要从三个方面对侦查决策的科学性产生重要的影响:即思维方法决定了侦查人员对案件的认知态度;思维方法决定了侦查人员的分析研究方法;创造性的思维方法是侦查决策的灵魂。因此,侦查人员应在大量的侦查实践活动中,有意识地反思并改进现有的思维方法和思维模式,培养和提高科学思维的能力,从而提升侦查决策的水平。