Racialized Religion and Judicial Injustice: How Whiteness and Biblicist Christianity Intersect to Promote a Preference for (Unjust) Punishment

America's judicial system is both exceptionally punitive and demonstrably unjust toward racial minorities. While these dual realities are structured into America's institutions, we propose they are also partially sustained by the intersection of ideologies that are both racialized and sacralized. Using multiple waves of the General Social Surveys and a unique measure that asks Americans to choose between two forms of judicial injustice (wrongful conviction or erroneous acquittal), we examine how white racial identity intersects with biblical literalism to bolster America's bent toward unjust punitiveness. In the main effects, Americans who affirm biblical literalism are more likely to show a preference for convicting the innocent, as are whites compared to Black Americans. Examining interaction effects, however, we find whiteness moderates the influence of biblical literalism such that only white biblical literalists (as opposed to non‐white biblical literalists or white non‐biblical literalists) are more likely to prefer wrongful conviction. Indeed, in our full model, being a white biblical literalist is the strongest predictor of preferring wrongful conviction. We theorize that preference for wrongful conviction over erroneous acquittal stems, at least in part, from the combination of sacralized authoritarianism and perceived racial threat.     

Justice in epistemic gaps: The ‘proof paradox’ revisited

This paper defends the heretical view that sometimes we ought to assign legal liability based on statistical evidence alone. Recent literature focuses on potential unfairness to the defending party if we rely on bare statistics. Here, I show that capitulating in response to ‘epistemic gaps’—cases where there is a group of potential harmers but an absence of individuating evidence—can amount to a serious injustice against the party who has been harmed. Drawing on prominent civil law litigation involving pharmaceutical and industrial negligence, the overall aim is to illustrate moral pitfalls stemming from the popular idea that it is never appropriate to rely on bare statistics when settling a legal dispute.     

Exploring Wellbeing in Youth with Vision Impairment: Insights for Vision Rehabilitation

Applied Research in Quality of Life - This article explores the discussions of 21 young Australians (aged 12–25) with vision impairment regarding their lived experiences and what it meant for...     

Non-associative fear acquisition: a review of the evidence from retrospective and longitudinal research

It is axiomatic that the capacity to experience fear is adaptive, enabling rapid and energetic response to imminent threat or danger. Despite the generally accepted utility of functional fear, the nature of maladaptive fear remains controversial. There is still no consensus about how specific fears and phobias are acquired and modulated. Two major schools of thought are apparent: those suggesting dysfunctional fear arises largely as the result of associative-conditioning processes versus those who favour more biologically based etiological explanations. In this regard, the non-associative model of fear acquisition postulates the existence of a limited number of innate, evolutionary-relevant fears, while emphasising conditioning modes of onset for evolutionary-neutral fears. Recent retrospective and longitudinal studies have tested predictions from the non-associative model. In general, findings support non-associative hypotheses and are difficult to reconcile with neo-conditioning explanations of fear acquisition. These data suggest that four pathways to fear may provide the most parsimonious theory of fear etiology. The theoretical and practical implications of adding a fourth, non-associative path to Rachman's (Behav. Res. Ther. (1977) 15, 375-387) three 'associative' pathways are discussed. Unresolved issues requiring further investigation are considered.     

Positive and negative symptoms of schizotypy and the Five-factor model: a domain and facet level analysis

In this study, we investigated the Five-factor model in the concurrent prediction of positive symptom schizotypy as measured by the Magical Ideation (Eckblad & Chapman, 1983) and Perceptual Aberration (Chapman, Chapman, & Raulin, 1978) scales and negative symptom schizotypy as measured by the Physical Anhedonia (Chapman, Chapman, & Raulin, 1976) and Revised Social Anhedonia (Eckblad, Chapman, Chapman, & Mishlove, 1982; Mishlove & Chapman, 1985) scales. Previous studies suggest that these measures reflect the core symptoms found in schizotypal and schizoid personality disorder (Bailey, West, Widiger, & Freiman, 1993). Negative symptoms were significantly predicted by Neuroticism (+), Extraversion (-), Openness (-), and Agreeableness (-) domains of the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R; Costa & McCrae, 1992). Additionally, positive symptoms were significantly predicted by Neuroticism (+), Openness (+), and Agreeableness (-). In addition, we examined the validity of lower order traits in de- scribing these symptoms of character pathology. These findings lend further support for the use of domain and facet scales of the NEO-PI-R in the identification of personality pathology.