1,721,118 research outputs found
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Get PDFThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Twilight-Zone Originalism: The Peculiar Reasoning and Unfortunate Consequences of New York State Pistol & Rifle Association v. Bruen
Get PDFThis Article consists of two Parts and a conclusion. Part I focuses on the Bruen opinion and considers its contradictions, flaws, fallacies, and implications. Part II examines lower-court decisions applying Bruen during the first year after that decision. These decisions make Bruen’s flaws vivid.
This abstract has been taken from the author\u27s introduction
Twilight-Zone Originalism: The Peculiar Reasoning and Unfortunate Consequences of New York State Pistol & Rifle Association v. Bruen
No full textThis Article consists of two Parts and a conclusion. Part I focuses on the Bruen opinion and considers its contradictions, flaws, fallacies, and implications. Part II examines lower-court decisions applying Bruen during the first year after that decision. These decisions make Bruen’s flaws vivid.
This abstract has been taken from the author\u27s introduction
Variations on the Author
Get PDF“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Two Ways to Think about the Punishment of Corporations
Get PDFThis article compares the criminal punishment of corporations in the twenty-first century with two ancient legal practices—deodand (the punishment of animals and objects that have produced harm) and frankpledge (the punishment of all members of a group when one member of the group has avoided apprehension for a crime). It argues that corporate criminal punishment is a mistake but that viewing it as frankpledge is less ridiculous than viewing it as deodand. The article considers the implications of the choice between these concepts for standards of corporate guilt and for the sentencing of corporate offenders. After a brief historical description of deodand and frankpledge, the article traces the history of corporate criminal liability from William Blackstone through Arthur Andersen. It emphasizes that this liability punishes the innocent, and it argues that the punishment of innocent shareholders and employees should not be regarded as collateral or secondary. The article notes that subjecting corporations and their officers to punishment for the same crimes creates sharp conflicts of interest. It reviews the history of the Justice Department\u27s efforts to exploit these conflicts—initially by encouraging corporate officers to deliver corporate guilty pleas to gain leniency for themselves and more recently by pressing corporations to gather and deliver information about their employees. The article suggests that defenses of corporate criminal liability fall into two categories. Arguments in the first category are expressive and match those that once might have defended deodand. Arguments in the second category are instrumental and match those that once might have supported frankpledge. Expressive retributivists champion the deodand perspective. They blame mindless legal entities for crimes committed by their employees. This article considers the implications of their arguments. Other defenders of corporate criminal liability view it as frankpledge—a device for persuading everyone in an organization to monitor everyone else. This article questions the propriety of declaring some people guilty of other people\u27s crimes simply to encourage them to police one another. On the assumption that corporate liability is here to stay, however, the article argues that it is better regarded as a means to induce internal monitoring than as bona fide criminal punishment. This article then considers the implications of the deodand and frankpledge positions. Neither of these positions justifies the federal rule of respondeat superior that authorizes the conviction of a corporation whenever an employee acting within the scope of his employment has committed a crime. The champions of both the deodand and frankpledge positions have in fact sought revision of this rule. Expressive retributivists propose replacing the rule with a corporate ethos standard. The article argues, however, that this standard is incoherent and unworkable. The reform advocated by the frankpledge proponents is more sensible. If the goal of corporate criminal liability is to induce appropriate monitoring, the creation and maintenance of an appropriate corporate compliance program should provide a defense to liability. Proposals for such a defense have not fared well, and this article considers their prospects. It suggests that, although the respondeat superior standard is truly indefensible, it survives because it affords broad powers to prosecutors. The article examines how prosecutors have used and misused their extraordinary powers. A final section of this article considers the implications of the frankpledge perspective for sentencing corporate offenders. A judge\u27s goal in punishing a corporation should be to induce a level of monitoring that will prevent more criminal harm than the monitoring will cost
The Corruption of the Pardon Power
Get PDFThis Article shows how the pardon power has been corrupted over the past forty years. It begins with a brief history of federal clemency. Throughout this history, presidents gave weight to the views of prosecutors and judges and afforded politicians considerable influence. Nevertheless, until well into the twentieth century, presidents liberally granted clemency to both prisoners and ex-offenders who, after completing their sentences, sought to erase their convictions.
In the early 1930s, as parole became a common means of releasing prisoners, the use of clemency to release prisoners declined. The abolition of parole in the 1980s, however, brought no revival of clemency. To the contrary, sentence commutations continued to fall and came close to the vanishing point. For the first time in its history, the United States had no functioning mechanism for releasing prisoners prior to the expiration of their sentences, and the federal prison population burgeoned. The last two years of the Obama administration did see a brief departure from this pattern.
As the front door to clemency closed, a back door opened. Presidents who emphasized how little sympathy they had for criminals took a different view when the criminals were people they knew. This Article describes troubling pardons granted by Presidents Reagan, George H. W. Bush, Clinton, and George W. Bush. The Article focuses primarily, however, on the clemency granted by President Trump. While thousands of clemency applications remained unresolved, Trump granted clemency to potential witnesses against him, political supporters, personal friends, people with political constituencies, rap stars, abusive law enforcement officers, war criminals, and people whose applications were championed by movie stars, professional athletes, and Fox News commentators. The Article describes many of Trump’s pardons and commutations. It concludes by asking whether the Framers erred by granting a nearly unfettered power to the president
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
Get PDFWe provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
Sentencing Reform and Prosecutorial Power: A Critique of Recent Proposals for \u27Fixed\u27 and \u27Presumptive\u27 Sentencing
Get PDF- …
