Fairness Reactions to Selection Methods: An Italian study

This study examined the fairness reactions to 10 personnel selection methods in a sample of Italian students. University students (N=137) were asked to rate the favorability of these selection procedures and then to evaluate them on eight procedural justice dimensions. Work‐sample tests were the most favorably rated of the selection methods, followed by résumés, written ability tests, interviews and personal references. Graphology was perceived negatively. Opportunity to perform and the perceived face validity of selection procedures were the strongest procedural justice dimensions for predicting the process favorability ratings. The results of this study are compared with those from similar studies conducted in other countries. Similar results have been found in the various countries where such research has been conducted to date.     

Hemispheric involvement in shadowing vs. interpretation: a time-sharing study of simultaneous interpreters with matched bilingual and monolingual controls

A time-sharing study used shadowing and interpretation/paraphrasing tasks to evaluate lateralization in professional interpreters individually matched to bilingual and monolingual controls. A two-step multivariate general linear model procedure was used to determine lateralized effects and extent of disruption produced by the tasks. Results revealed the monolingual group to be left lateralized for both tasks, but the two bilingual groups were lateralized in the LH only for shadowing. The monolingual group was significantly different from the bilingual groups in the pattern of hand asymmetry for interpretation/paraphrasing. The findings replicate outcomes of prior repeated measures analysis of variance procedures on percentage of change scores. However, new information is added by the more refined analysis. The findings are also discussed in terms of previous laterality studies using similar tasks and subject samples.     

“This project is mad”: Descartes,Derrida, and the notion of philosophical crisis

In “Cogito and the History of Madness,” Derrida maintains that crisis is endemic to philosophy rather than being, as Husserl forcefully argued, a temporary condition that can and must be overcome through the resources of reason. A reflection on the place of madness in Descartes's Meditations serves as the point of departure for demonstrating that Derrida has done an injustice to philosophy; and a comparison of Derrida's views with the thought of Husserl, Heidegger, and Nietzsche reveals that Derrida's position in “Cogito and the History of Madness” entails a sacrifice of the notion of responsibility that lies at the center of meaningful historical action.     

Competing interests: The need to control conflict of interests in biomedical research

Individual and institutional conflict of interests in biomedical research have becomes matters of increasing concern in recent years. In the United States, the growth in relationships — sponsored research agreements, consultancies, memberships on boards, licensing agreements, and equity ownership — between for-profit corporations and research universities and their scientists has made the problem of conflicts, particularly financial conflicts, more acute. Conflicts can interfere with or compromise important principles and obligations of researchers and their institutions, e.g., adherence to accepted research norms, duty of care to patients, and open exchange of information. Disclosure is a key component of a successful conflict policy. Commitments which conflict with a faculty member's primary obligations to teaching, research, administrative responsibilities, or patient care also need attention. Institutional conflict of interests present different problems, some of which are discussed in an analysis of an actual problem posed by two proposed clinical trials. This paper is adapted from a lecture presented to a Symposium on Scientific Integrity, Warsaw, Poland, 23 November 1995. Daniel Steiner was Vice-President and General Counsel of Harvard University (1972–92) and in that capacity became familiar with conflict of interest issues. He is currently Counsel to the Boston law firm. Ropes and Gray, and is Adjunct Lecturer in Public Policy at the John F. Kennedy School of Government. Harvard University.     

Technology transfer at Harvard University

This memorandum was prepared by Daniel Steiner, General Counsel to Harvard University on behalf of the President's Office and distributed to the faculty in October, 1980. It reviews recent Harvard policy with regard to patents and technology transfer. Spurred by recombinant DNA research, at Harvard and elsewhere, benefits and pitfalls of the University's participation as a minor shareholder in a company engaged in research and development are identified. The author notes that “The memorandum has benefited from numerous discussions with members of the faculty and administration and in particular from the comments of President (Derek) Bok and Dean (Henry) Rosovsky.”     

From structuralism to Marxism (and Back?): Jan Mukařovský 1945–1963

Studies in East European Thought - The paper covers the last phase of Jan Muka?ovský’s career between 1945 and 1964 during which his scholarly outlook underwent several steep...     

Fabry disease in genetic counseling practice: recommendations of the National Society of Genetic Counselors

The objective of this document is to provide health care professionals with recommendations for genetic counseling and testing of individuals with a suspected or confirmed diagnosis of Fabry disease, with a family history of Fabry disease, and those identified as female carriers of Fabry disease. These recommendations are the opinions of a multicenter working group of genetic counselors, medical geneticists, and other health professionals with expertise in Fabry disease counseling, as well as an individual with Fabry disease who is a founder of a Fabry disease patient advocacy group in the United States. The recommendations are U.S. Preventive Task Force Class III, and they are based on clinical experience, a review of pertinent English-language articles, and reports of expert committees. This document reviews the genetics of Fabry disease, the indications for genetic testing and interpretation of results, psychosocial considerations, and references for professional and patient resources. These recommendations should not be construed as dictating an exclusive course of management, nor does use of such recommendations guarantee a particular outcome. The professional judgment of a healthcare provider, familiar with the facts and circumstances of a specific case, will always supersede these recommendations.