Practical Considerations in the Interview and Evaluation of Sexual Offenders

SUMMARY

The evaluation and assessment of sexual offenders is different than any other type of evaluation, and most clinicians are not properly trained to interview this population. This article addresses the clinical and ethical issues particular to the interview, assessment, and evaluation of these types of offenders. It offers both practical information regarding the interview itself, along with an overview of classification systems, paraphilias, and assessment techniques used with this population. In addition, issues related to risk assessment and risk management are also addressed, and an introduction to the use of actuarial risk assessment instruments is provided.     

What Determines Trust in Information About Food-Related Risks? Underlying Psychological Constructs

Trust in risk information about food related-hazards may be an important determinant of public reactions to risk information. One of the central questions addressed by the risk communication literature is why some individuals and organizations are trusted as sources of risk information and others are not. Industry and government often lack public trust, whereas other sources (for example, consumer organizations, the quality media, medical doctors) are highly trusted. Problematically, previous surveys and questionnaire studies have utilized questions generated by the investigators themselves to assess public perceptions of trust in different sources. Furthermore, no account of the hazard domain was made. In the first study reported here, semistructured interviewing was used to elicit underpinning constructs determining trust and distrust in different sources providing food-related risk information ( n = 35). In the second study, the repertory grid method was used to elicit the terminology that respondents use to distinguish between different potential food-related information sources ( n = 35), the data being submitted to generalised Procrustes analysis. The results of the two studies were combined and validated in survey research ( n = 888) where factor analysis indicated that knowledge in itself does not lead to trust, but that trusted sources are seen to be characterised by multiple positive attributes. Contrary to previous research, complete freedom does not lead to trust—rather sources which possess moderate accountability are seen to be the most trusted.     

浅说采访立场和新闻报道的正确性

树立正确的采访立场,确保新闻报道的正确性,是对每个新闻媒体和新闻从业人员的要求。但在实际工作中,新闻报道的"真实性"、"准确性"与"正确性"的内在联系和区别往往混淆不清。正确的新闻报道要在真实性的原则上,解决好"倾向性"的问题,要善于从总体上、本质上和发展趋势上把握事物的"真实性"。同时,新闻报道的正确程度还要接受人民大众的评判和检验,人民的信任是衡量采访立场和新闻报道正确性的尺子。     

Introduction: “There Is a Person Here”: An Interview with Judith Butler

In this interview, the coeditors, along with other contributors, ask Judith Butler a variety of questions regarding queer theory, gender identities, scientific and legal discourse, bodily abjection, race and class positioning, and political organizing. This range of subject matter suggests not only the breadth of Butler's work, but also its applicability to any number of people, whose relation to theory ranges from highly politicized to politically indifferent. The interview demonstrates the responsiveness of Butler's work to cultural translation and political action.     

张兵先生学术访谈录

张兵先生是复旦大学古代文学研究学者。他勤奋、刻苦,著作等身,在学界有一定的知名度。他涉足的研究领域很宽,话本、小说与文化和武侠小说是其心力倾注的三个方面。他第一次提出的“准话本”概念和小说是一种文化的界定曾在学界引起了强烈的反响。     

采访在现代电视纪录片中的作用

采访在现代电视纪录片中具有重要作用。这是因为它具有如下功能 :采访影响主题的确定 ,直接构成纪录片的主要内容 ,推动情节发展 ,传达特定信息。因此 ,应该重视采访手段在纪录片中的运用     

从结果、行为到行为人：隐性采访的伦理抉择

道德困惑一直是隐性采访争论的焦点，功利主义、绝对命令、中庸之道等西方道德哲学在一定程度上能解读隐性采访面临的伦理困境。从行为的结果、行为本身到行为人，三种伦理学关注的焦点形成了一个呈逆时针方向的圆圈。功利主义是务实的，绝对命令维护了道德的纯洁性，中庸之道强调行为主体的道德修养，在这三种伦理框架的综合指导运用下，隐性采访完成了从客体到主体、由客观到主观的推理过程，伦理抉择变得更为连贯和一致，渐渐成为一种内涵。     

后新时期国内新闻舆论监督研究述评

从舆论监督的难点、隐性采访与新闻舆论监督、新闻舆论监督与反腐败、新闻舆论监督与新闻官司 ,以及加强新闻舆论监督的途径等五个方面 ,对后新时期新闻舆论监督研究的现状进行描述 ;从操作设计与理论探讨、内部分析与外部研究、取向多元与学科建构三个维面 ,对后新时期国内新闻舆论监督研究中的存在问题进行检讨 ;对新世纪的新闻舆论监督研究方向提出建设性思考     

企业经营管理人才招聘面试考官评分问题研究

面试作为企业经营管理人才甄选的重要手段 ,越来越被企业所接受和应用。在企业经营管理人才招聘面试过程中 ,考官对考生的评分具有高度一致性 ,是高质量的 ;考官评分时掌握的标准存在差异 ,但不影响面试的公正性 ;考官的知识、经验对评分没有影响 ;考生的表现对考官评分有影响 ,对中间表现考生的评分不易达成一致。