Assessing multiple prior models of behaviour under ambiguity

The recent spate of theoretical models of behaviour under ambiguity can be partitioned into two sets: those involving multiple priors and those not involving multiple priors. This paper provides an experimental investigation into the first set. Using an appropriate experimental interface we examine the fitted and predictive power of the various theories. We first estimate subject-by-subject, and then estimate and predict using a mixture model over the contending theories. The individual estimates suggest that 24% of our 149 subjects have behaviour consistent with Expected Utility, 56% with the Smooth Model, 11% with Rank Dependent Expected Utility and 9% with the Alpha Model; these figures are close to the mixing proportions obtained from the mixture estimates where the respective posterior probabilities of each of them being of the various types are 25%, 50%, 20% and 5%; and using the predictions 22%, 53%, 22% and 3%. The Smooth model appears the best.     

Understanding the meanings of children: a reflexive process

This paper identifies a number of children's voices within qualitative academic writing. It suggests that researchers can discover a variety of children's voices by employing reflexive techniques to ensure that their interpretations are not influenced by their personal prejudice, or the ethics, tools, roles and theories of their professional paradigm. It concludes that those who work with children may be able to reinforce the theme of the UN Convention on Rights of the Child by employing this reflexive approach to enable them to attribute equal status to the views of all the children whom they encounter.     

Public Research, Private Concerns: ethical issues in the use of open-ended interviews with people who have learning difficulties

This paper is an exploration of the ethical dilemmas in open-ended interview research with people with learning difficulties. We address the possibility that research which gives voice to the experience of abuse, from the viewpoint of the victim, can itself be abusive. Such research is justified in terms of empowering, illuminating and disseminating the meaning that participants give to their lives. Yet every stage of the process raises complex ethical issues when research participants are drawn from vulnerable and powerless groups in society, and the focus for investigation can be deemed private. As a vehicle for our exploration, we reflect on our ethical dilemmas in researching the story of a young woman who has learning difficulties and has been the victim of various forms of abuse. We argue that ethical dilemmas cannot be overcome solely by Ethical Codes or even predetermined 'good practice'. They are integral to the whole research process and necessitate continuous explicit examination of decision making processes within research.     

DESENSITIZING HERBERT BLUMER'S WORK ON RACE RELATIONS

Recent applications of Herbert Blumer's group position model to the study of contemporary race prejudice have misrepresented the ongoing process of definition and accommodation that, according to Blumer, mediates race relations. By conforming to the canons of research design and using standard sample surveys, public opinion polls, variables analysis, and statistical techniques to study perceptions of group threat, group hostility, and prejudicial attitudes, Blumer's dynamic social imagery, as well as the socially grounded methodology he sought to promote, are undermined. The result is a static depiction of race relations that has nothing to do with the variegated experiential complexities that Blumer claimed underlie all human group life.