Publication Type: Abstract
Abstract: Objectives/intent:
� Implement an active, problem solving method for teaching large groups of students with limited resources.
� Improve student learning by utilizing immediate, corrective feedback.
Methods/process: 130 students are placed into 24 groups of 5-6 students. Students prepare for the exercise by reading assignments and/or lectures. During the class hour, students receive a patient case that applies information learned during their advance preparation. Students individually answer a series of multiple choice questions based on the case. Students then work as a group to repeat the exercise by discussing the questions and coming to consensus on the correct response. Answers are recorded on the IF-AT form, a scratch off version of the scantron answer sheet. A star indicates the correct answer. If incorrect, the student group can choose a second or third choice for partial credit. Each student receives the grade achieved by the group activity.
Results/outcomes: Application of the IF-AT improved student attendance. Faculty who used the technique reported that groups were fully engaged in the process. Data from student surveys will be analyzed prior to the July meeting.
Implications: Application of the IF-AT process permits one instructor to conduct group learning in a large class with little or no assistance. Students are fully engaged in problem solving with immediate feedback on their performance. The IF-AT is well-suited to progressive activities where students need to discern the correct information before proceeding to the next step. This process can be used in a variety of disciplines within the pharmaceutical sciences.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Recent research in our laboratory has suggested that intuitive approaches to deception detection may improve the accuracy of distinguishing between true and false accounts. The current study extends this research by employing a more practical manipulation of processing type in which participants are instructed to enact in deliberative vs. intuitive processing as they attempt to detect deception. The theoretical and practical aspects of the results of this line of research will be discussed.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Deterrence-compellence theory has a history of bridging multiple divides. Research has examined conventional deterrence (Mearsheimer, 1985), nuclear deterrence (Jervis, 1989), extended immediate deterrence (Huth & Russett, 1983 Lebow & Stein, 1989; George & Smoke, 1970), and deterrence in rivalries and protracted crises (Lieberman 1995; Harvey, 1997, 1999). Moreover, policy analysts, historians and case study researchers, formal modelers, and statisticians have all demonstrated an interest in deterrence and compellence. Recently, deterrence has even gained some traction with those interested in counterterrorism (Davis and Jenkins, 2002; Lebovic, 2006). For the most part, however, the literature on counterterrorism has dismissed deterrence theory assuming it to be inapplicable to counterterrorist operations. There are three reasons why we ought not be so quick to reject deterrence theory: first, most of the work rejecting deterrence theory has attempted to do so on theoretical rather than empirical grounds; second, most empirical deterrence research has been conducted with respect to immediate extended deterrence not immediate deterrence, the situation of interest here; and third, the success or failure of deterrence as a counterterrorist strategy may be a function of the organization in question. Some terrorist organizations use terrorism as a mode rather than a logic of action (Wieviorka, 1994; Marx, 2007) and this may well impact the usefulness of deterrence in counterterrorism. As a logic of action or “pure terrorism” organizations tend to be clandestine, require limited resources, and blend into the population. When terrorism is one mode of action among others, however, the organization tends to be different – it attempts to control territory, establish a counterstate, and provide public goods and services(Marx, 2007; McColl, 1966). Such organizations may prove to be far more deterable. The question of course is why do organizations that fit this mould – e.g, LTTE, HAMAS, Hezbollah, FARC – continue to use terrorism? Three possibilities exit: one answer is that deterrence simply fails in these situations; another is that immediate deterrence attempts are never made; and finally, deterrence attempts are made but improperly implemented. Using the protracted crisis approach developed by Harvey (1999), this paper will examine immediate deterrence and compellence exchanges between the government of Sri Lanka (GSL) and the LTTE. The protracted crisis approach has the advantage of examining multiple deterrence exchanges between two actors, while also admitting the possibility that position of challenger and defender can change in each exchange. That is, in some cases it may be the LTTE that issues the deterrent or compellent threat rather than the state. Deterrence theory presumes that for a deterrent threat to succeed three conditions must be met: (1) the threat must be clearly communicated; (2) the deterrer must have the capability to implement the threat; and (3) the deterrer must be sufficiently committed to follow through (Lebow, 1981; Harvey, 1999; 2000). After identifying the deterrent-compellent exchanges between the LTTE and the GSL from 1995-2000, the paper will examine the data using a fuzzy set analysis (Ragin, 2000). One of the great advantages of studying deterrence in this way is that it is possible to assess whether or not the theory succeeds and fails for the right reasons – that is, does deterrence fail in the absence of one of the conditions and does it succeed when all of the conditions are met. Interestingly, we can also evaluate Harvey’s (1999) finding that improperly implemented deterrent threats tend to lead to an escalation of violence. In the end, this paper will bridge multiple divides: it applies deterrence research from international relations in the context of domestic counterterrorism, it bridges the gap between theoretical studies and policy-relevant analysis, and it applies a methodology that splits the difference between large-N and small-n analysis.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: Challenges and Successes: Surveying Court Users Immediately After a Court Proceeding

This paper will serve two purposes. First, findings will be presented from survey data from court users as part of an evaluation for Unified Family Courts in California. Secondly, the authors will review the challenges and lessons learned in surveying this hard to reach population. The evaluation design uses mixed methods and has 5 research elements, however, only the survey component will be addressed in this paper.

Historically, the court system has struggled to address the multiple, yet overlapping, family and juvenile issues that bring families into their courtrooms. One family may have many issues before several judges, such as a marital dissolution, domestic violence, juvenile delinquency and dependency. Court staff report that these problems result in duplicative services, conflicting court orders, and repeat appearances on related issues before different judges. The Judicial Council of California funded six pilot projects for three years to address multiple and crossover cases. The strategies in the county projects include a range of strategies, such as sharing information through case file bundling, increased communication among judges and stakeholders, and unification of all cases for one family before one judge.

These structural changes to the court system could, theoretically, affect a litigants� court experience. In attempting to measure this, the researchers found that soliciting the opinions of litigants shortly after a court hearing appears to be a fairly new methodology, according to extant literature. Several court-based studies have used a general public telephone survey or focus groups of litigants after some time has passed after their hearing. Other studies have used a web or email survey to assess satisfaction.

There are obvious advantages to soliciting customer satisfaction after time has passed from a court hearing. Confidentiality concerns surrounding juvenile delinquency, dependency and domestic violence cases made many of these methods infeasible and anonymous surveys were deemed necessary. Indeed, court personnel expressed concern over protecting these vulnerable populations from interviewers. Additionally, concerns were raised about whether litigants would be in an appropriate state of mind to complete such a questionnaire. A handful of studies from the late 1980s on procedural justice indicated that litigants were able to distinguish the outcome of their case from how they were treated in court. The litigant perspective, despite these concerns, was a critical component of the evaluation design.

Using a convenience sampling method, interviewers approached litigants over the age of 18 as they were leaving a family or juvenile court and asked them to complete a written survey comprised of 21 questions. Litigants were asked about their understanding of what happened in court and other general questions about their court experience. Litigants were given the option to return the survey via mail.

This paper will address the ethical and political dilemmas faced by the authors in attempting to survey this hard to reach population, as well as the implications of the final methodology used. Baseline survey data and analyses stratified by the various case types will also be presented.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: This paper discusses the relationship between various levels of media gratifications. It proposes both an analytic and an empirical differentiation between: (1) Gratifications expected, i.e. na�ve theories held by media users about the capacity of different media channels (here: World Wide Web and television). This type of gratification is depicted by traditional survey methods of uses and gratifications research. (2) Gratifications sought and obtained measured directly in the situation. It is argued that conventional survey methods capture gratifications independent of the using situation. Therefore the respondent has to remember and generalize his/her usual media behavior. This might lead to an answering bias. We propose a situational measurement by using the �Experience Sampling Method� that induces self-observations at random points in time. This method depicts behavior and attitudes while using mass media. Results show that the situational measurement is helpful in understanding media gratifications and in predicting media behavior.