Illustrating behavioral principles with examples from demography: the causal analysis of differences in fertility

This article evaluates the 3 general frames of reference used in analyzing the nonphysiologic origins of fertility differences: utility, normative, and drift. It is suggested that the drift model overcomes some of the limitations of the other 2 models and provides a closer approximation to behavioral realities. Implicit in the utility model is the assumption that people's behavior expresses their preferences amony available alternatives. It is further assumed that the individual has available a range of possible behaviors, means to the atgtainment of behavioral goals chosen, and reliable information concerning the likely consequences of a given choice. A weakness of this approach has been its rather parochial concentration on economic costs and benefits and its failure to take account of the ways these costs and benefits are differentially assessed and weighted by different populations. The normative model emphasizes the individual's group affiliations and social roles. A criticism of this model is that it ignores the possibility of conflict among the different norms associated with an individual's various roles or among interacting individuals such as husbands and wives. Together, the utility and normative models imply the existence of more conscious rationality in human behavior than may actually be the case. The 3rd model, drift, emphasizes the ongoing, developmental, incemental nature of human behavior. It posits a behavior that begins almost by accident at some point within the range of possible and allowable behaviors, then moves toward conslusion in a manner largely imperceptible to the actor. The idea of drift is compatible with the observation that social structures are constantly changed while at the same time providing the framework within which reproducing and changing behaviors can unfold. In contrast to the utility and normative models, which tend to be static, the drift model emphasizes both change and the manner in which change takes place.     

Leadership development:: A review in context

Interest in leadership development is strong, especially among practitioners. Nonetheless, there is conceptual confusion regarding distinctions between leader and leadership development, as well as disconnection between the practice of leadership development and its scientific foundation. The present review examines the field of leadership development through three contextual lenses: (1) understanding the difference between leader development and leadership development (conceptual context); (2) reviewing how state-of-the-art development is being conducted in the context of ongoing organizational work (practice context); and (3) summarizing previous research that has implications for leadership development (research context). The overall purpose is to bridge the practice and science of leadership development by showing the importance of building both human and social capital in organizations. Specific practices that are reviewed include 360-degree feedback and executive coaching, mentoring and networking, and job assignments and action learning. Practices and research are framed in terms of a general need to link leader development, which is primarily based on enhancing human capital, with leadership development that emphasizes the creation of social capital in organizations.     

From hegemony to affinity

Drawing upon a critique of the (post)Marxist theory of hegemony and examples from contemporary activism, this article assesses new possibilities for the construction of radical alternatives within and against postmodern globalizing capitalism. It notes that many elements of the ‘newest’ social movements have taken a turn away from the universalizing conception of social change that is characteristic of the logic of hegemony as it has developed. within (post)Marxism and (neo)liberalism. Instead, these activist currents are driven by an anarchist logic of affinity. Along with this logic has come an emphasis on direct action tactics, which is discussed. with reference to a theoretical distinction between a politics of the act and a politics of demand. Although most existing paradigms of social movement analysis have not addressed. these shifts, they are implicitly acknowledged. in the concept of constituent power developed. by Michael Hardt and Toni Negri. Their work falls short, however, to the extent that it remains in other respects within the tradition of hegemonic thought. To more fully comprehend current developments, it is necessary to construct an alternative genealogy based. on anarchist theory and practice, with a focus on the tradition of ‘structural renewal’ that finds it apogee in the work of Gustav Landauer.     

Couple Differentiation: Mediator or Moderator of Depressive Symptoms and Relationship Satisfaction?

The purpose of this investigation was to determine whether differentiation at the couple level would act as a moderator or a mediator in the association between marital satisfaction and depressive symptoms over time. In a sample of 412 couples, a latent profile analysis was performed to determine how couple differentiation scores were clustered. An Actor/Partner Interdependence Model was then estimated via a group comparison procedure in structural equation modeling. There was no evidence of a moderating effect of differentiation. A mediating model was then estimated and there was evidence that differentiation mediated the association between depressive symptoms and relationship satisfaction via actor and partner effects.     

Acquired immune deficiency syndrome projections in England and Wales: interplay of methodology and data

Since the late 1980s, regular monitoring of the human immunodeficiency virus epidemic in England and Wales has been carried out through the work of successive national working groups. One of their tasks has been to provide short-term projections of the incidence of acquired immune deficiency syndrome. In this paper the data and methods used in this projection work are reviewed and results critically assessed with the aim of highlighting the strong interaction between methodological developments and data acquisition.