Addiction focuses on the emergence, nature, and persistence of addictive behavior, as well as the efforts of addicts to overcome their condition. Do addicts act of their own free will, or are they driven by forces beyond their control? Do structured treatment programs offer more hope for recovery? What causes relapses to occur? Recent scholarship has focused attention on the voluntary aspects of addiction, particularly the role played by choice. Addiction draws upon this new research and the investigations of economists, psychiatrists, philosophers, neuropharmacologists, historians, and sociologists to offer an important new approach to our understanding of addictive behavior.

The notion that addicts favor present rewards over future gains or penalties echoes throughout the chapters in Addiction. The effect of cultural values and beliefs on addicts, and on those who treat them, is also explored, particularly in chapters by Elster on alcoholism and by Acker on American heroin addicts in the 1920s and 1930s. Essays by Gardner and by Waal and Mørland discuss the neurobiological roots of addiction Among their findings are evidence that addictive drugs also have an important effect on areas of the central nervous system unrelated to euphoria or dysphoria, and that tolerance and withdrawal phenomena vary greatly from drug to drug.

The plight of addicts struggling to regain control of their lives receives important consideration in Addiction. Elster, Skog, and O'Donoghue and Rabin look at self-administered therapies ranging from behavioral modifications to cognitive techniques, and discuss conditions under which various treatment strategies work. Drug-based forms of treatment are discussed by Gardner, drawing on work that suggests that parts of the population have low levels of dopamine, inducing a tendency toward sensation-seeking.

There are many different explanations for the impulsive, self-destructive behavior that is addiction. By bringing the triple perspective of neurobiology, choice, and culture to bear on the phenomenon, Addiction offers a unique and valuable source of information and debate on a problem of world-wide proportions.

JON ELSTER is Edward L. Ryerson Distinguished Service Professor of Political Science and Philosophy at the University of Chicago.

CONTRIBUTORS: Caroline Jean Acker, George Ainslie, Jon Elster, Eliot L. Gardner, Olav Gjelsvik, Jørg Mørland, Ted O’Donoghue, Matthew Rabin, Ole-Jørgen Skog, Helge Waal, and Gary Watson
 

How can we identify the young men and women who, as social and behavioral scientists of tomorrow, will do the needed research to resolve our burgeoning social problems? How can the most promising be attracted to an investigatory career? How can they become identified with the behaviors, attitudes and values that persons in science share?

A provocative body of literature about the psychology of the scientist and his career emerged in the post-Sputnik era. Drs. Eiduson and Beckman bring together more than seventy of the most significant and representative studies. These range over childhood and family influences, academic experiences, motivations, interests, and intellectual and personality strengths that have been examined as precursors for choosing science as adult work. The psychological mechanisms involved in socializing a young person toward a scientific career are suggested in readings from the outstanding theoreticians in the field. Selections on scientific career lines, decisions and options at various stages of work, and factors influencing goals and career development contribute to the understanding of the psychological life of the highly endowed and well-functioning professional adult.

Through showing the certain completeness of effort of what has been learned about the psychology of scientists to date, the authors anticipate a resurgence of interest in the creative individual, a renewed enthusiasm for application, and a refocusing of research on the issues unique to the social and behavioral research scientist.

BERNICE T. EIDUSON is associate professor in the Department of Psychiatry at the University of California at Los Angeles School of Medicine.

LINDA BECKMAN is adjunct assistant professor in the same department.

Psychologists now understand that identity is not fixed, but fluid and highly dependent on environment. In times of stress, conflict, or change, people often adapt by presenting themselves in different ways and emphasizing different social affiliations. With changing demographics creating more complex social groupings, it is important to understand the costs and benefits of the way social groups are categorized, and the way individuals understand, cope with, and employ their varied social identities. Navigating the Future, edited by Geraldine Downey, Jacquelynne Eccles, and Celina Chatman, answers that call with a wealth of empirical data and expert analysis.

Navigating the Future focuses on the roles that social identities play in stressful, challenging, and transitional situations. Jason Lawrence, Jennifer Crocker, and Carol Dweck show how the prospect of being negatively stereotyped can affect the educational success of girls and African Americans, making them more cynical about school and less likely to seek help. The authors argue that these issues can be mitigated by challenging these students educationally, expressing optimism in their abilities, and emphasizing that intelligence is not fixed, but can be developed. The book also looks at the ways in which people employ social identity to their advantage. J. Nicole Shelton and her co-authors use extensive research on adolescents and college students to argue that individuals with strong, positive connections to their ethnic group exhibit greater well-being and are better able to cope with the negative impact of discrimination. Navigating the Future also discusses how the importance and value of social identity depends on context. LaRue Allen, Yael Bat-Chava, J. Lawrence Aber, and Edward Seidman find that the emotional benefit of racial pride for black adolescents is higher in predominantly black neighborhoods than in racially mixed environments.

Because most people identify with more than one group, they must grapple with varied social identities, using them to make connections with others, overcome adversity, and understand themselves. Navigating the Future brings together leading researchers in social psychology to understand the complexities of identity in a diverse social world.

GERALDINE DOWNEY is assistant professor of psychology at Columbia University.

JACQUELYNNE S. ECCLES is Wilbert McKeachie Collegiate Professor of Psychology, Women's Studies, and Education and research scientist at the Institute for Social Research at the University of Michigan.

CELINA M. CHATMAN is associate director of the Center for Human Potential and Public Policy at the Irving B. Harris Graduate School of Public Policy Studies at the University of Chicago.

CONTRIBUTORS: J. Lawrence Aber, LaRue Allen, Susan M. Andersen, Yael Bat-Chava, Niall Bolger, Jennifer Crocker, William E. Crocker Jr., Andrea L. Dottolo, Carol S. Dweck, Andrew J. Fuligni, Diane Hughes, Jason S. Lawrence, Bonita London, Oksana Malanchuk, Tracy McLaughlin-Volpe, Rodolfo Mendoza-Denton, Elizabeth Moje, Edward Seidman, J. Nicole Shelton, Abigail J. Stewart, Linda C. Strauss, Tom R. Tyler, Elizabeth Velilla, Niobe Way, Carol Wong, Tiffany Yip.

Every day, it seems, we become aware of some new technological or chemical hazard. Yet it is also possible that this very awareness is new, or at least newly heightened. Why are certain kinds of risks suddenly so salient? Are public perceptions of risk simply the sum of individual reactions to individual events, or do social and cultural influences play a role in shaping our definitions of safety, acceptable risk, and danger?

Prompted by public outcries and by the confusion and uncertainty surrounding risk management policy, social scientists have begun to address themselves to the issue of risk perception. But as anthropologist Mary Douglas points out, they have been singularly reluctant to examine the cultural bases of risk perception, preferring to concentrate on the individual perceiver making individual choices. This approach leaves unexamined a number of crucial social factors—our concepts of what is “natural” or “artificial,” for example; our beliefs about fairness, and our moral judgements about the kind of society in which we want to live.

This provocative and path-breaking report seeks to open a sociological approach to risk perception that has so far been systematically neglected. Describing first some exceptions to the general neglect of culture, Douglas builds on these clues and on her own broad anthropological perspective to make a compelling case for focusing on social factors in risk perception. She offers a challenge and a promising new agenda to all who study perceptions of risk and, by extension, to those who study human cognition and choice as well.

"An altogether brilliant piece of writing—far-reaching and a joy to read." —Amartya Sen, Oxford University

MARY DOUGLAS is a Visiting Professor at Princeton University.

A Volume in the the Russell Sage Foundation's Social Science Frontiers Series

This fascinating symposium is based on an assumption that no longer seems to need justification: that the institution of marriage is today experiencing profound changes. But the nature of those changes—their causes and consequences—is very much in need of explication. The experts contributing to this volume bring a wide range of perspectives—sociological, anthropological, economic, historical, psychological, and legal—to the problem of marriage in modern society. Together these essays help illuminate a form of relationship that is both vulnerable and resilient, biological and social, a reflection of and an influence on other social institutions.

Contemporary Marriage begins with an important assessment of the revolution in marital behavior since World War II, tracing trends in marriage age, cohabitation, divorce, and fertility. The focus here is primarily on the United States and on idustrial societies in general. Later chapters provide intriguing case studies of particular countries. There is a recurrent interest in the impact on marriage of modernization itself, but a number of essays probe influences other than industrial development, such as strong cultural and historical patterns or legislation and state control. Beliefs and expectations about marriage are explored, and human sexuality and gender roles are also considered as factors in the nature of marriage.

Contemporary Marriage offers a rich spectrum of approaches to a problem of central importance. The volume will reward an equally broad spectrum of readers interested in the meaning and future of marriage in our society.

KINGSLEY DAVIS is senior research fellow at the Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace at Stanford University.

CONTRIBUTORS: Grace Ganz Blumberg, Elwood Carlson, Kingsley Davis, Thomas J. Espenshade, Amyra Grossbard-Shechtman, Joy Hendry, Adam Kuper, John Modell, Rachel Pasternack, Yochanan Peres, James E. Smith, Graham B. Spanier, Alan A. Stone, Donald Symons, Lenore J. Weitzman, and Margery Wolf.

Did America’s democratic convictions “change forever” after the terrorist attacks of September 11? In the wake of 9/11, many pundits predicted that Americans’ new and profound anxiety would usher in an era of political acquiescence. Fear, it was claimed, would drive the public to rally around the president and tolerate diminished civil liberties in exchange for security. Political scientist Darren Davis challenges this conventional wisdom in Negative Liberty, revealing a surprising story of how September 11 affected Americans’ views on civil liberties and security.

Drawing on a unique series of original public opinion surveys conducted in the immediate aftermath of 9/11 and over the subsequent three years, Negative Liberty documents the rapid shifts in Americans’ opinions regarding the tradeoff between liberty and security, at a time when the threat of terrorism made the conflict between these values particularly stark. Theories on the psychology of threat predicted that people would cope with threats by focusing on survival and reaffirming their loyalty to their communities, and indeed, Davis found that Americans were initially supportive of government efforts to prevent terrorist attacks by rolling back certain civil liberties. Democrats and independents under a heightened sense of threat became more conservative after 9/11, and trust in government reached its highest level since the Kennedy administration. But while ideological divisions were initially muted, this silence did not represent capitulation on the part of civil libertarians. Subsequent surveys in the years after the attacks revealed that, while citizens’ perceptions of threat remained acute, trust in the government declined dramatically in response to the perceived failures of the administration’s foreign and domestic security policies. Indeed, those Americans who reported the greatest anxiety about terrorism were the most likely to lose confidence in the government in the years after 2001. As a result, ideological unity proved short lived, and support for civil liberties revived among the public. Negative Liberty demonstrates that, in the absence of faith in government, even extreme threats to national security are not enough to persuade Americans to concede their civil liberties permanently.

The September 11 attacks created an unprecedented conflict between liberty and security, testing Americans’ devotion to democratic norms. Through lucid analysis of concrete survey data, Negative Liberty sheds light on how citizens of a democracy balance these competing values in a time of crisis.
 
DARREN W. DAVIS is professor of political science at Michigan State University.

Since 1948, when pollsters unanimously forecast a Dewey victory over Truman, media-sponsored polls have proliferated, accompanied by a growing unease about their accuracy. Pre-Election Polling probes the results of over 430 recent polls and taps the professional “lore” of experienced pollsters to offer a major new assessment of polling practices in the 1980s.

In a study of unusual scope and depth, Crespi examines the accuracy of polls conducted before a range of elections, from presidential to local. He incorporates the previously unpublished observations and reflections of pollsters representing national organizations (including Gallup, Roper, and the CBS/New York Times Poll) as well as pollsters from state, academic, and private organizations. Crespi finds potential sources of polling error in such areas as sampling, question wording, anticipating turnout, and accounting for last-minute changes in preference. To these methodological correlates of accuracy he adds important political considerations—is it a primary or general election; what office is being contested; how well known are the candidates; how crystallized are voter attitudes?

Polls have become a vital feature of our political process; by exploring their strengths and weaknesses, Pre-Election Polling enhances our ability to predict and understand the complexities of voting behavior.

"Combines intelligent empirical analysis with an informed insider's interpretation of the dynamics of the survey research process....Should be studied not only by all practitioners and students of opinion research but by anyone who makes use of polls." —Leo Bogart, Newspaper Advertising Bureau, Inc.

IRVING CRESPI heads Irving Crespi & Associates in Princeton, consultants in opinion and consumer research. He has taught at City University of New York/Bernard M. Baruch College, State University of New York/Harpur College, and Rutgers University.