Publication Type: Abstract Proposal
Abstract: We have, in the collection of the Institute of Egyptian Art and Archaeology (IEAA) at the Art Museum of the University of Memphis, a granodiorite head of a sculpture of the god Amun (IEAA 1990.4.1). Apart from being dislocated from its body, the head is in good condition and exhibits carefully modeled features and exquisite craftmanship. Donated to the Institute anonymously by area businessmen in 1990, the sculpture is uninscribed and its original provenance is unknown. The IEAA Amun head illustrates the combination of two well-established traditions of ancient Egypt: the worship of the deity Amun and the artistic practice of sculptural representation. Currently, the Institute lists the sculpture as "Late New Kingdom, later Dynasty 18 … or Third Intermediate Period." Through stylistic analysis and comparison to similar, published sculpture, this paper seeks to determine a date for and possible provenance of the Amun head. This presentation will also offer possible reconstructions of the statue's original and complete state and comment on the question of "portraiture" in Egyptian art. Additionally, I hope to place the statue within a greater religious and art historical context, so we might achieve a better understanding of its purpose, function, and the reason for its creation.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Like the mythical two-headed llama from the children’s novel Doctor Dolittle, North American integration is simultaneously facing in two diametrically opposed directions: towards greater policy and regulatory harmonization, pushed primarily by transnational corporate interests; and away from greater pooling of sovereignty and loosening of democratic oversight, pulled independently by the left (transnational and local social justice activists) and the right (mainly U.S.-based anti-immigrant groups). This situation is not entirely new – the "bottom-up" drive for greater integration fueled by players in an increasingly continental economy has long been met both by resistance from opponents of corporate-led globalization and by a vacuum of political leadership in the wake of the scalding NAFTA debates of 1993. What is new is the weighing in of the executives of all three NAFTA states on the side of policy harmonization. The Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (known as SPP), established in 2005, fills the decade-long policy vacuum with a web of intergovernmental relations which are designed to advance integration across multiple issue areas incrementally, in part by focusing on regulations that are not subject to congressional/parliamentary oversight. This "under the radar" form of integration may be highly pragmatic and may appeal to business "stakeholders," but it signals a failure of political leaders to recognize that the "North American Community" they claim to support cannot be sustained politically without public diplomacy and democratic accountability. If anything, as this paper will show, the SPP has become a lightning rod for opposition from the right and the left, across the three NAFTA states, re-igniting citizen fears of lost sovereignty and putting into jeopardy the regional cooperation paradigm itself.

Publication Type: Abstract
Abstract: Recent Medicare legislation calls on the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality to conduct research related to the comparative effectiveness of health care items and services, including prescription drugs. This reinforces earlier calls by government officials for “practical clinical trials” involving clinically relevant treatment alternatives. Using a game theoretic model, we explore the decision of pharmaceutical companies to conduct such “head-to-head” comparative trials. The model suggests that an important factor affecting this decision is the potential loss in market share and profits following a result of inferiority or comparability. This “hidden cost” is higher for the Market Leader than the Market Follower, making it less likely that the Leader will choose to conduct a trial. The model also suggests that in a full-information environment it will never be the case that both firms choose to conduct such a trial. Furthermore, if market shares and the probability of proving superiority are similar for both firms, it is quite possible that neither firm will choose to conduct a trial. Finally, our results indicate that incentives that offset the direct cost of a trial can prevent a “no-trial equilibrium”, even when both firms face the possibility of an inferior outcome.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: The project examines how and why U.S. governors participate in American foreign relations. It argues that governors should be analyzed because they are significant transgovernmental actors and participate in transnational relations. Changing political and economic conditions in the international system have helped to bring U.S. states (and other subnational governments) into the realm of world politics. Analysis is performed on governors’ generally-defined foreign relations activities and hypotheses related to gubernatorial power, economic interdependence, geography, and party are tested with statistical analysis performed on U.S. states between 1995 and 2006. This is combined with information and context provided by the author’s numerous interviews with U.S. state and federal government officials. Findings indicate that border state governors with greater informal powers are most likely to participate in foreign relations and to do so during a time of war. The economic size of a U.S. state is also a factor as well as other socioeconomic variables. This topic provides both empirical and theoretical challenges to the current literature and examines a subject likely to remain important for years to come.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: Content analyses of news coverage for four high profile conflicts provides a natural history of the use of the contingency theory in public relations. The content analysis tracked the changing stances of four organizations (UPS, American Airlines, USDA, Massachusetts Military Reservation) moving on the continuum from pure advocacy to pure accommodation, in response to a number of contingent factors that can just as readily move an organization toward accommodation as toward advocacy. Employing conflict and conflict resolution models from the conflict studies literature to advance the contingency theory in public relations, results confirm that perspectives of an organization and its public change over time, but both parties in each conflict demonstrated overall “advocacy” and employed a “contending” strategy dominantly during the conflict management process. The changing aspects over time were influenced predominantly by two contingent factors, “internal threats” and “external threats.”