Relative Risk Aversion: What Do We Know?

The relative risk aversion measure that represents the risk preferences of a decision maker depends on the outcome variable that is used as the argument of the utility function, and on the way that outcome variable is defined or measured. In addition, the relationship between any two such relative risk aversion measures is determined by the relationship between the corresponding outcome variables. These well-known facts are used to adjust several reported estimates of relative risk aversion so that those estimates can be directly compared with one another. After adjustment, the significant variation in the reported relative risk aversion measures for representative decision makers is substantially reduced. JEL Classification: D81     

Labor Shortages:Should We Take Precautionary Measures?

While people generally worry about unemployment and the pressures on employment in China, the relationship between supply and demand in the labor market has quietly shifted in the opposite direction. First, shortages of migrant workers occurred in coastal areas in 2004 and have not yet been alleviated. Even in some central provinces     

Poverty and Pediatric Palliative Care: What Can We Do?

It has been recognized that families of children with life-limiting health conditions struggle with significant financial demands, yet may not have awareness of resources available to them. Additionally, health care providers may not be aware of the socioeconomic needs of families they care for. This article describes a mixed-methods study examining the content validity and utility for health care providers of a poverty screening tool and companion resource guide for the pediatric palliative care population. The study found high relevance and validity of the tool. Significant barriers to implementing the screening tool in clinical practice were described by participants, including: concerns regarding time required, roles and responsibilities, and discomfort in asking about income. Implications for practice and suggestions for improving the tool are discussed. Screening and attention to the social determinants of health lie within the scope of practice of all health care providers. Social workers can play a leadership role in this work.     

Does Anything Work?

This paper reviews the results of effectiveness research in five areas of professional practice: social work, psychotherapy and counseling, corrections, psychiatric hospitalization, and education. In all these areas the research indicates that, at best, professionals are operating with little or no empirical evidence validating their efforts, since lack of effectiveness was the rule rather than the exception. In addition, a pattern of deterioration was found in which clients of professionals frequently were found to do less well than people with similar problems who received no professional services whatsoever. Some hypotheses are presented that may account for this situation, and a number of suggestions are offered for enhancing the effectiveness of professionals in all five areas. To the extent that professionals are unable or unwilling to make substantial changes in their practice, the paper concludes that such changes may be imposed from outside the professions in the form of governmentally mandated standards and regulations.     

Do Public Officials Trust Citizens? A Welfare State Perspective

In this exploratory study, we investigate whether public sector officials and non‐public sector officials differ in the trust they have in members of society and whether this difference is associated with the welfare regime in which they work. Using survey data from the sixth round of the European Social Survey, we compare public sector officials' trust to that of non‐public sector officials in 13 countries with four different forms of welfare regimes. Our results demonstrate that public officials have a higher level of trust than non‐public officials do. Furthermore, trust among both public and non‐public sector officials is much higher in social‐democratic regimes, followed by corporatist countries, liberal regimes, Israel (as a unique case) and, lastly, southern European regimes. As expected, public officials' degree of trust reflects the general trends of their societies. Interestingly, in social‐democratic regimes, differences between trust among public and non‐public officials are the highest compared to the other regimes. In addition, an individual‐level analysis in five countries illustrative of each welfare regime indicates that while income, belonging to a minority group, and age are significant factors in explaining public officials' trust, socio‐demographic variables contribute little to the differences between public and non‐public officials. Given the critical role of trust in the functioning of the welfare state, our results imply that further awareness and mechanisms for increasing the degree of trust of citizens among public officials are warranted.     

The Establishment Of Mass Mammographic Screening Programs: In Whose Interests?

The provision of mass mammographic screening programs for all women over the age of 50 years in Australia has received widespread support from the popular press, politicians and society in general. However health professionals have expressed doubts about the desirability of implementing such programs before their broader efficacy has been properly assessed. This paper asserts that consideration of the opinions, experiences and attitudes of women has been largely neglected in both the popular media and medical circles. The symbolic meanings surrounding high technology, cancer and the body are discussed with reference to the mammography issue. It is argued that the psychological costs to women who are induced to enter a mammogram program require greater attention. Of particular importance is the case of those women who are forced to undergo further medical investigation when a suspicious lesion is discovered. It is concluded that the interests of women are not necessarily served by the Australian government's decision to use scare resources to fund mass mammographic screening programs.     

Does religion foster generosity?

This paper reviews recent studies that claim to provide support, through statistical analysis of survey data, for the traditional proposition that being religious makes people more generous. The studies have serious shortcomings. First, the data consist exclusively of self-reports. Second, the dependent and independent variables are conceptually problematic and ill-defined. Third, even if there is a positive correlation between religious involvement and personal generosity, it may be due to selection bias. Thus, these studies do not provide serious evidence for the traditional hypothesis. Moreover, it has been directly controverted by experimental studies of economic and other behaviors.     

Does consultation improve decision-making?

This paper reports an experiment designed to test whether prior consultation within a group affects subsequent individual decision-making in tasks where demonstrability of correct solutions is low. In our experiment, subjects considered two paintings created by two different artists and were asked to guess which artist made each painting. We observed answers given by individuals under two treatments: In one, subjects were allowed the opportunity to consult with other participants before making their private decisions; in the other, there was no such opportunity. Our primary findings are that subjects in the first treatment evaluate the opportunity to consult positively, but they perform significantly worse and earn significantly less.