Them and Us: Hidden Ideologies-Differences in Degree or Kind?

This article looks at three measuring instruments—the Right-Wing Authoritarianism Scale, the Social Dominance Orientation Scale, and the Attitudes About Reality Scale—used to examine covert ideology and its relationship to social and political beliefs and behaviors. These scales share similar ideological components involving abdication of moral responsibility to an outside agent, belief that one's own ideology represents the only form of truth, and negative beliefs about individuals who are not members of one's own group. Evidence is provided to suggest that radical fundamentalists and some groups within U.S. society share ideological beliefs that differ in degree rather than kind. These beliefs make it easy for them to divide the world into "us" and "them" and exacerbate the present conflict.     

A note on deriving rank-dependent utility using additive joint receipts

Luce and Fishburn (1991) derived a general rank-dependent utility model using an operation ⊕ of joint receipt. Their argument rested on an empirically supported property (now) calledsegregation and on the assumption that utility is additive over ⊕. This note generalizes that conclusion to the case where utility need not be additive over ⊕, but rather is of a more general form, which they derived but did not use in their article. Tversky and Kahneman (1992), conjecturing that the joint receipt of two sums of money is simply their sum, criticized that original model because ⊕=+ together with additive utility implies the unacceptable conclusion that the utility of money is proportional to money. In the present generalized theory, if ⊕=+, utility is a negative exponential function of money rather than proportional. Similar results hold for losses. The case of mixed gains and losses is less well understood.     

Decisions concerning the allocation of scarce medical resources

This paper aimed to determine the criteria participants use to make decisions about scarce medical resources (allocation to use a kidney machine). It varied information about patients on 4 factors (sex, smoking, employment status, community service). It also set out to see if decisions made in groups differed from aggregated decisions of those made alone. In the first study, participants completed a simple questionnaire requiring them to rank-order sixteen hypothetical patients. In the second study, a group discussion (in groups of three participants) preceded the group putting an agreed rating on the identical questionnaire. Participants favoured patients who were employed, non-smokers and participated in community service. This suggests that participants adopted a utilitarian moral ideology. Participants' smoking habits interacted with the hypothetical patients' smoking habits, indicating in-group favouritism. In the second study it was found that when the decision was made in a group of three it amplifies the decision made by an individual. In this sense there was clear evidence of group polarization.     

A service tracking and referral form to monitor the receipt of services in a case management program

Too often, systematic recording procedures are not developed which describe and assess the delivery of social work--and, more specifically, case management--services. The authors report on the Service Tracking and Referral Form developed by California's Adolescent Family Life Evaluation Project to document the receipt of services by pregnant adolescent clients as a result of case management intervention. The rationale and process underlying the development and use of the project's Service Tracking and Referral Form are discussed. Data are presented to illustrate the kinds of information which can be generated from the form. Finally, the authors discuss the form's utility and the possible uses of these types of data for case management, supervisory, administrative, and evaluative purposes.     

On the foundations of mean-variance analyses

Let (, ) and (, ) be mean-standard deviation pairs of two probability distributions on the real line. Mean-variance analyses presume that the preferred distribution depends solely on these pairs, with primary preference given to larger mean and smaller variance. This presumption, in conjunction with the assumption that one distribution is better than a second distribution if the mass of the first is completely to the right of the mass of the second, implies that (, ) is preferred to (, ) if and only if either > or ( = and < ), provided that the set of distributions is sufficiently rich. The latter provision fails if the outcomes of all distributions lie in a finite interval, but then it is still possible to arrive at more liberal dominance conclusions between (, ) and (, ).This research was supported by the Office of Naval Research.     

Social security in a globalizing world

The main burden of the paper is to argue for enlarging both the concept and the coverage of social security, especially in developing countries, to address the twin problems of "deficiency" and "adversity". The two parts of this enlarged concept of social security are Basic Social Security (BSS) and Contingent Social Security (CSS). To strengthen the argument, lessons have been highlighted from the historical experience of Western countries, where the State played a leading role. Having argued for the extension of BSS, the paper also deals with the extension of CSS. This is best done through the informal economy, which employs a large majority of workers in developing countries. While the primacy of the State has been highlighted, the paper develops a typology of various social security models that could be used to study and understand the existing arrangements as well as the potentialities for extension.