The Impact of Comprehensive Community Initiatives on Population-Level Child,Youth, and Family Outcomes: A Systematic Review

Comprehensive community initiatives (CCIs) represent a popular method for creating systemic change, yet there is a dearth of evidence on their effectiveness (Zaff, Pufall Jones, Donlan, Lin, & Anderson, 2016). This article presents a systematic review of the evidence on the population-level impact of CCIs, focusing specifically on documented effects from studies using an experimental or quasi-experimental design. Of 1,947 articles identified through a database and hand search, 25 articles examining six different CCIs—most of which employed prevention science frameworks—met the review inclusion criteria. The results of this review show that CCIs can strengthen protective factors and reduce risk factors, delay initiation of and reduce substance use, and reduce the likelihood of, and delay engagement in, violent and/or delinquent behaviors. Impacts have been documented as soon as one year after initial intervention, and as early as 7^th grade, with effects sustained as long as seven years post-intervention, and as late as a year post-high school. However, relative to the prevalence of CCIs as a practical intervention, the evidence base is small, potentially dated, and focused on a narrow set of outcomes and populations. Recommendations for interpreting the evidence base are discussed, including methodological limitations and implications for future work.     

Alternative Models of Price Behavior in Dyadic Negotiations: Market Prices, Reservation Prices, and Negotiator Aspirations

Three competing predictors of price are manipulated in a two-party distributive negotiation. These include prevailing market prices, negotiator reservation prices, and negotiator aspirations. We offer a cognitive interpretation of how each type of information is incorporated into the negotiator′s thought processes as an alternative cognitive reference point. In two studies varying the levels of these three factors, only reservation prices, not prevailing market prices or negotiator aspirations, account for significant variance in negotiated outcomes. Discussion is offered, suggesting that the negotiator as decision maker may experience a "dominant reference point" effect. When multiple pieces of relevant information are available, the negotiator may only be able to focus on one of them. Among the three predictors studied, the reservation price may be cognitively interpreted as the most absolute limit.     

Meeting the Evil God Challenge

The evil God challenge is an argumentative strategy that has been pursued by a number of philosophers in recent years. It is apt to be understood as a parody argument: a wholly evil, omnipotent and omniscient God is absurd, as both theists and atheists will agree. But according to the challenge, belief in evil God is about as reasonable as belief in a wholly good, omnipotent and omniscient God; the two hypotheses are roughly epistemically symmetrical. Given this symmetry, thesis belief in an evil God and belief in a good God are taken to be similarly preposterous. In this paper, we argue that the challenge can be met, suggesting why the three symmetries that need to hold between evil God and good God – intrinsic, natural theology and theodicy symmetries – can all be broken. As such, we take it that the evil God challenge can be met.