Effects of a Punitive Environment on Children's Executive Functioning: A Natural Experiment

Few studies have examined the influence of environmental factors on children's executive functioning (EF) performance. The present study examined the effects of a punitive vs. non‐punitive school environment on West African children's EF skills. Tasks included a ‘cool’ (relatively non‐affective) and ‘hot’ (relatively affective/motivational) version of three EF tasks: delay of gratification; gift delay; and dimensional change card sort. Children had more difficulties with the hot versions of the tasks than the cool versions, and older children outperformed younger children. After controlling for verbal ability (Peabody picture vocabulary test‐third edition), a consistent pattern of interaction between school and grade level emerged. Overall, kindergarten children in the punitive school performed no differently than their counterparts in the non‐punitive school. However, in grade 1, children in the punitive school performed significantly worse than their counterparts in the non‐punitive school. These results point to the need to consider interactions among discipline style, age, and internalization processes of self‐regulation to better understand environmental influences on EF development.     

降低刑事责任年龄否定论

降低刑事责任年龄的提议主要立足于三个命题:“犯罪低龄化”现象严重,降低刑事责任年龄是解决“低龄犯罪人”问题的应然手段,低龄未成年人已具备相当的辨认、控制能力。通过对实证数据与相关论据的收集分析,前两个命题得到证伪,第三个命题无法证明,由此可以否定降低刑事责任年龄观点的合理性依据。从我国历史与近代刑事责任年龄设定的发展历程来看,调整年龄节点的主张从未停止,援用的理由相差无几,经历过多次变动与论证后延续至今,具备符合我国社会发展实践的合理性与稳定性。从我国的义务教育设置与年龄之间的对应关系出发,刑事责任年龄确定的基准点应以义务教育的结束为合理节点,采取“从高到低”的刑事责任年龄设定逻辑。综合上述理由,兼顾少年司法“教育为主、惩罚为辅”刑事政策导向,最终得出当前的刑事责任年龄设置合理,不需降低的结论。     

取消民族成份作假考生录取资格的合法性质疑

对于民族成份作假骗取高考加分的考生,教育行政部门作出的取消录取资格的处理,在性质上属于行政处罚,应当遵守《行政处罚法》的有关规定。有关行政规范性文件不属于法的渊源,民族成份作假考生的行为不是应当受到行政处罚的违法行为,对考生实施行政处罚缺乏事实根据。行政规范性文件无权设定行政处罚,依据有关行政规范性文件取消考生录取资格,缺乏法律依据。有关部门取消考生录取资格也没有遵循《行政处罚法》规定的程序,不具有合法性。     

刑事政策与管制刑改革

刑事政策对刑事司法实践具有极强的指导性和影响力。经过近半个世纪的发展沿革,我国形成了内涵特定的“宽严相济”刑事政策。结合倡导非监禁刑的刑罚轻缓化的时代背景看,这种刑事政策给有着社会化、家庭化、人道化等特点的管制刑营造了难得的改革契机。在下一步的修改完善中,不但需要根据“宽严相济”刑事政策要求来设置管制刑,而且还应当在非监禁刑改革中依法适当扩大适用管制刑。     

缓刑制度研究

我国刑法中的缓刑是以犯罪人人身危险性的基本消失为适用前提的行刑制度。虽然刑法界对缓刑制度的性质和地位认识不同,但缓刑制度作为一种刑罚执行制度,具有裁量与行刑的双重属性。缓刑作为一种刑罚制度,起源于西方,它的产生是与自由刑的广泛适用紧密联合在一起的,我国的缓刑制度是清末从西方引进的,它是在总结实践经验的基础上,参考了其他国家的缓刑制度而制定的。它体现了我国刑法的社会性质,又考虑了犯罪分子的具体情况。目前我国的缓刑制度与其他一些国家关于缓刑条件的规定相比,是比较科学的、合理的。它既考虑了犯罪事实的客观因素,又考虑了犯罪分子的认罪态度的主观因素,既考虑了犯罪分子的人身危险性,又考虑了其平时的一贯表现和今后不致再危害社会的可能性。     

The structure and vulnerability of a drug trafficking collaboration network

Prior research has established that collaboration networks exhibit heavy-tailed degree distributions, assortative degree mixing, and large clustering coefficients. Using court record data, we assess these properties in a collaboration network among heroin traffickers. Consistent with prior research, we find an exponential degree distribution and strong local clustering. However, the traffickers mix dissortatively by degree rather than assortatively. Using a graph sampling method, we show that a consequence of dissortative mixing is that targeted vertex removals have a greater impact on the connectivity and cohesion of the trafficking network. We also note the importance of degree mixing for characterizing and identifying topological weaknesses.     

Problems and Solution for Criminal and Attached Civil Procedure on Juvenile Delinquency Cases According to

2012年修改的我国《刑事诉讼法》实施后,未成年人犯罪案件刑事附带民事诉讼中可能存在“合适成年人”无法作为民事诉讼法定代理人以维护有关未成年人民事权益、适用“当事人和解的公诉案件诉讼程序”时将被告人赔偿与否作为量刑情节而造成对被告人不公、适用“简易程序”时法官施压调解而干预阻碍被告人行使民事诉讼权利、审判人员能否兼备审理刑事案件与民事案件的专业素养等问题。为了在发挥刑事附带民事诉讼制度优点的同时一定程度上控制其缺陷所造成的不利影响,司法解释应规定在未成年人犯罪案件中,刑事附带民事诉讼制度不适用于刑事附带民事诉讼的民事部分标的金额较大的情形、被告人可能被判处较重刑罚的情形、刑事附带民事诉讼的刑事部分与民事部分审级不一致的情形、案件审理时间较长的情形。     

论我国刑法中的主客观辩证统一关系

对立统一规律是唯物辩证法的基本规律 ,它在我国刑法中表现为主观与客观相统一的原理 ,具体体现在犯罪构成理论、共同犯罪理论和数罪并罚理论中     

基于演化博弈的供应链协同产品开发合作机制研究

针对由制造商与供应商构成的两层供应链系统,基于演化博弈理论和方法,研究在长期的协同产品开发过程中,有限理性的制造商和供应商之间的合作机制。首先,对合作的成本分担与收益分配机制进行了分析;然后,对监督和惩罚机制进行了探讨。理论研究、数值模拟和实例分析结果表明:双方进行协同产品开发合作的概率与合作超额收益和单独研发的收益正相关、与研发总费用和背叛收益负相关;存在一个最优的超额收益分配比例,使得制造商和供应商合作的可能性最大化;合作双方支付的成本与双方合作超额收益的分配正相关;在监督条件下,合理的惩罚将有利于减少背叛行为。     

Unjust punishment in organizations

What causes leaders to punish subordinates unjustly? And why might leaders keep punishing subordinates unjustly, even when this increases workplace misconduct? In the current paper we address these questions by suggesting that power and status cause leaders to punish unjustly. We review evidence on the effects of power and status on punishment, review how unjust punishments foster misconduct, and highlight how this creates a self-perpetuating feedback loop—leaders are more likely to punish in an unjust manner when subordinates engage in misconduct, but subordinates’ misconduct is partly caused by unjust punishments. We also discuss how leader-subordinate distrust may be at the heart of this phenomenon and how organizations may counteract unjust punishments. We draw attention to research areas that have received little attention and draw up an agenda for future research. Taken together, we integrate the literatures on power, status, punishment and trust, review evidence on when unjust punishments become perpetuating, challenge research suggesting that leaders are cautious when punishing, and guide future research on the topic of punishment in organizations.