This first study considers patients' frequent complaints about anxiety, frustration, loneliness, boredom, and uselessness. It suggests changes, some of an almost obvious nature, which might be made in the physical and social environment of the wards to reduce the sense of strangeness and the cold, impersonal atmosphere that aggravate these discomforts.

ESTHER L. BROWN joined the Russell Sage Foundation in Manhattan in 1930 as a research associate and at her retirement in 1963 was its director of executive program planning.

Based on two national surveys, one of adults and one of secondary school students, this volume reports on respondents' experiences with and their attitudes toward standardized tests of intelligence. The authors analyze the relations between a person's beliefs about the nature of intelligence, his or her estimate of his or her own intelligence, attitudes concerning tests, and other personal characteristics.

ORVILLE G. BRIM, JR. is president of the Russell Sage Foundation and a sociologist.

DAVID C. GLASS is professor of psychology at New York University.

JOHN NEULINGER is assistant professor of psychology at City College of The City University of New York.

IRA J. FIRESTONE is assistant professor of psychology at Wayne State University.
 

There has hitherto been limited systematic social research on the prolongation and termination of life, and minimal agreement of the resolution of the moral and social dilemmas that dying provokes. Among the topics discussed by the contributors are: the social context of dying—when, where, and why people die; what they think about death; the cultural background of the patients' attitudes; and how medical practitioners cope with terminal illness. The social, ethical, legal, and economic problems arising from the prolongation and termination of life are also set forth.

ORVILLE G. BRIM, JR. is president of the Foundation for Child Development and former president of the Russell Sage Foundation.

HOWARD E. FREEMAN is director of the Institute for Social Science Research and professor of sociology at University of California, Los Angeles.

SOL LEVINE is university professor of sociology and community medicine at Boston University.

NORMAN SCOTCH is professor and chairman of the Department of Socio-Medical Services and Community Medicine at Boston University School of Medicine.

CONTRIBUTORS: Richard M. Bailey, Orville G. Brim, Jr., Diana Crane, Howard E. Freeman, Barney G. Glaser, Robert J. Glaser, Richard A. Kalish, Andie L. Knutson, Louis Lasagna, Monroe Lerner, Sol Levine, Bayless Manning, Robert S. Morison, Osler L. Peterson, David L. Rabin, Laurel H. Rabin, John W. Riley, Jr., Elisabeth K. Ross, Norman A. Scotch, Anselm L. Strauss, David Sudnow, Greer Williams
 

The mere word “bureaucracy” brings to mind images of endless lines, piles of paperwork, and frustrating battles over rules and red tape. But some bureaucracies are clearly more efficient and responsive than others. Why? In Teaching, Tasks, and Trust, distinguished political scientists John Brehm and Scott Gates show that a good part of the answer may be found in the roles that middle managers play in teaching and supporting the front-line employees who make a bureaucracy work.

Brehm and Gates employ a range of sophisticated modeling and statistical methods in their analysis of employees in federal agencies, police departments, and social service centers. Looking directly at what front-line workers say about their supervisors, they find that employees who feel they have received adequate training have a clearer understanding of the agency’s mission, which leads to improved efficiency within their departments. Quality training translates to trust – employees who feel supported and well-trained for the job are more likely to trust their supervisors than those who report being subject to constant monitoring and a strict hierarchy. Managers who “stand up” for employees—to media, government, and other agency officials—are particularly effective in cultivating the trust of their workers. And trust, the authors find, motivates superior job performance and commitment to the agency’s mission. Employees who trust their supervisors report that they work harder, put in longer hours, and are less likely to break rules. The authors extend these findings to show that once supervisors grain trust, they enjoy greater latitude in influencing how employees allocate their time while working.

Brehm and Gates show how these three executive roles are interrelated—training and protection for employees gives rise to trust, which provides supervisors with the leverage to stimulate improved performance among their workers. This new model—which frames supervisors as teachers and protectors instead of taskmasters—has widespread implications for training a new generation of leaders and creating more efficient organizations.

Bureaucracies are notorious for inefficiency, but mid-level supervisors, who are often regarded as powerless, retain tremendous power to build a more productive workforce. Teaching, Tasks, and Trust provides a fascinating glimpse into a bureaucratic world operating below the radar of the public eye—a world we rarely see while waiting in line or filling out paperwork.

JOHN BREHM is professor of political science at the University of Chicago.

SCOTT GATES is research professor at the International Peace Research Institute, Oslo, and professor at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology.

A Volume in the Russell Sage Foundation Series on Trust

The police and the courts depend on the cooperation of communities to keep order. But large numbers of urban poor distrust law enforcement officials. Legitimacy and Criminal Justice explores the reasons that legal authorities are or are not seen as legitimate and trustworthy by many citizens.

Legitimacy and Criminal Justice is the first study of the perceived legitimacy of legal institutions outside the U.S. The authors investigate relations between courts, the police, and communities in the U.K., Western Europe, South Africa, Slovenia, South America, and Mexico, demonstrating the importance of social context in shaping those relations. Gorazd Meško and Goran Klemenčič examine Slovenia’s adoption of Western-style “community policing” during its transition to democracy. In the context of Slovenia’s recent Communist past—when “community policing” entailed omnipresent social and political control—citizens regarded these efforts with great suspicion, and offered little cooperation to the police. When states fail to control crime, informal methods of law can gain legitimacy. Jennifer Johnson discusses an extra-legal policing system carried out by farmers in Guerrero, Mexico—complete with sentencing guidelines and initiatives to reintegrate offenders into the community. Feeling that federal authorities were not prosecuting the crimes that plagued their province, the citizens of Guerrero strongly supported this extra-legal arrangement, and engaged in massive protests when the central government tried to suppress it. Several of the authors examine how the perceived legitimacy of the police and courts varies across social groups. Graziella Da Silva, Ignacio Cano, and Hugo Frühling show that attitudes toward the police vary greatly across social classes in harshly unequal societies like Brazil and Chile. And many of the authors find that ethnic minorities often display greater distrust toward the police, and perceive themselves to be targets of police discrimination. Indeed, Hans-Jöerg Albrecht finds evidence of bias in arrests of the foreign born in Germany, which has fueled discontent among Berlin’s Turkish youth. Sophie Body-Gendrot points out that mutual hostility between police and minority communities can lead to large-scale violence, as the Parisian banlieu riots underscored.

The case studies presented in this important new book show that fostering cooperation between law enforcement and communities requires the former to pay careful attention to the needs and attitudes of the latter. Forging a new field of comparative research, Legitimacy and Criminal Justice brings to light many of the reasons the law’s representatives succeed—or fail—in winning citizens’ hearts and minds.

ANTHONY BRAGA is a senior research associate at the Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, and at the Berkeley Center for Criminal Justice at the University of California, Berkeley.

JEFFREY FAGAN is professor of law and public health at Columbia University, and director of the Center for Crime, Community and Law at Columbia Law School.

TRACEY MEARES is professor of law at Yale Law School.

ROBERT SAMPSON is Henry Ford II Professor of the Social Sciences at Harvard University.

TOM R. TYLER is University Professor of Psychology at New York University.

CHRIS WINSHIP is Diker-Tishman Professor of Sociology at Harvard University and also a member of the faculty of the Kennedy School of Government.

CONTRIBUTORS: Hans-Jorg Albrecht, Catrien Bijleveld, Sophie Body-Gendrot, Anthony Braga, John Braithwaite, Ignacio Cano, Jean Camaroff, John Camaroff, Jeffrey Fagan, Hugo Fruhling, Heike Goudriaan, Mike Hough, Jennifer L. Johnson, Goran Klemencic, Marijke Malsch, Tracey Meares, Gorazd Mesko, Graziella Moraes, Sebastian Roche, Robert Sampson, David J. Smith, Michael Tonry, Chris Winship.

A Volume in the Russell Sage Foundation Series on Trust

Focusing on issues of particular importance to black people, and confronting the rich variety and the complexity of the black experience, the many contributors demonstrate the broad diversity of research interests and strategies among black psychologists, from the traditional to the innovative. Topics covered include studies of motivation, cognitive development, life-span development, and cultural difference versus deficit theories. Many of the studies directly refute previous conceptions of the psychological functioning of blacks and offer alternative models and formulations.

This book is the first to present soundly designed and executed research that is emphatically linked to the perspectives and the psychological concerns of black Americans. In designing these studies, the authors aimed to ameliorate the pressing educational and social problems of blacks through a better understanding of their life conditions.

A. WADE BOYKIN is associate professor of psychology at Cornell University and associate editor of the Journal of Black Psychology.

ANDERSON J. FRANKLIN is associate professor of clinical psychology in the Graduate Center and at City College of the City University of New York.

J. FRANK YATES is associate professor of psychology at the University of Michigan.

CONTRIBUTORS:  John D. Bacon,  W. Curtis Banks,  Oscar Barbarin, A. Wade Boykin,  Michael Cole,  O. Jackson Cole,  William Collins,  William E. Cross Jr.,  Herman W. Dorsett,  Ozzie L. Edwards,  Anderson J. Franklin,  Lenora Fulani, William S. Hall,  Algea . Harrison,  Janet L. Hubbart,  James S. Jackson,  Ronald M. Jennings,  James M. Jones,  Yvonne B. Kelley, Gregory V. McQuater, Lillian Patterson,  John Peterson,  Diane S. Pollard,  Stephen Reder,  James E. Savage,  Sandra A. Sims,  Anita D. Stearns,  Ewart A. C. Thomas,  M. Belinda Tucker, Janet Williams, Carl O. Word,  J. Frank Yates.

One in four American adults doesn’t have a bank account. Low-income families lack access to many of the basic financial services middle-class families take for granted and are particularly susceptible to financial emergencies, unemployment, loss of a home, and uninsured medical problems. Insufficient Funds explores how institutional constraints and individual decisions combine to produce this striking disparity and recommends policies to help alleviate the problem.

Mainstream financial services are both less available and more expensive for low-income households. High fees, minimum-balance policies, and the relative scarcity of banks in poor neighborhoods are key factors. Michael Barr reports the results of an in-depth study of financial behavior in 1,000 low- and moderate-income families in metropolitan Detroit. He finds that most poor households have bank accounts, but combine use of mainstream services with alternative options such as money orders, pawnshops, and payday lenders. Barr suggests that a tax credit for banks serving primarily disadvantaged customers could facilitate greater equality in the private financial sector.

Drawing on evidence from behavioral economics, Sendhil Mullainathan and Eldar Shafir show that low-income individuals exhibit many of the same patterns and weaknesses in financial decision making as middle-class individuals and could benefit from many of the same financial aids. They argue that savings programs that automatically enroll participants and require them to actively opt out in order to leave the program could drastically increase savings ability. Ronald Mann demonstrates that significant changes in the credit market over the past fifteen years have allowed companies to expand credit to a larger share of low-income families. Mann calls for regulations on credit card companies that would require greater disclosure of actual interest rates and fees. Raphael Bostic and Kwan Lee find that while home ownership has risen dramatically over the past twenty years, elevated risks for low-income families—such as foreclosure—may well outweigh the benefits of owning a home.

The authors ultimately argue that if we want to demand financial responsibility from low-income households, we have an obligation to assure that these families have access to the banking, credit, and savings institutions that are readily available to higher-income families. Insufficient Funds highlights where and how access is blocked and shows how government policy and individual decisions could combine to eliminate many of these barriers in the future.

REBECCA M. BLANK is the Robert S. Kerr Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institution.

MICHAEL S. BARR is professor of law at the University of Michigan Law School.

CONTRIBUTORS: Raphael W. Bostic, Daryl Collins, Kwan Ok Lee, Ronald J. Mann, Jonathan Morduch, Sendhil Mullainathan, Una Okonkwo Osili, Anna L. Paulson, Daniel Schneider, John Karl Scholz, Ananth Seshadri, Eldar Shafir, Michael Sherraden, Peter Tufano.

A Volume in the National Poverty Center Series on Poverty and Public Policy

How are human subjects treated in biomedical research? What are the expressed standards and self-reported behavior of biomedical researchers in regard to what has sometimes been called their “animal of necessity”? What are some of the determinants of the “strict” and “permissive” patterns which describe the standards and behavior of biomedical researchers? These are the important questions asked and answered in Research on Human Subjects. It is a book based on four years of intensive research. Two studies were completed, one on a nationally representative sample of biomedical research institutions, a second on a sample of 350 researchers who actually use human subjects.

In their chapters on “the dilemma of science and therapy,” the authors look at the tension between the values of humane therapy and discovery in science. They show that the significant minority of researchers who are “permissive” on the issues of informed consent and a favorable risk-benefit ratio are more likely to be those who are “relative failures” in pursuing the science value.

Research on Human Subjects also documents the inadequate training that biomedical researchers get in the ethics of research on human subjects not only in medical schools but in their postgraduate training as well. The medical schools pay relatively more attention to the scientific training of their students than they do to the ethical training that should be its essential complement.

The local peer review groups that screen research on human subjects in the institutions where it is carried on are another central focus of attention of the research and analysis reported in this book. The peer review groups do a fairly good job but, the authors show, there are various conditions of their relative efficacy which are not met by review groups in many important research institutions. The medical school review groups, for example, have not been outstanding performers with respect to the several conditions of relative efficacy.

In the concluding chapter, the authors discuss the general problem of the social responsibilities of powerful professions and make very specific suggestions for policy change and reform for the biomedical research profession and its use of human subjects.

BERNARD BARBER is on the Barnard College and Graduate Faculties of Columbia University.

JOHN J. LALLY is at Lehman College, CUNY.

JULIA LOUGHLIN MAKARUSHKA is at Barnard College, Columbia University.

DANIEL SULLIVAN, formerly of Barnard College, now teaches at Carleton College.

Sensitivity training, T-Groups, and encounter groups have become a way of life. Beyond Words traces the history of this movement, the background of its successes, its varieties, and its failures. Dr. Back's approach is neither one of wide-eyed admiration nor hostility. Instead, he has written a book that provides the first long, hard look at sensitivity training as a social phenomenon.

From its fortuitous beginnings the movement is followed through its developments at Bethel, its growth across the country, its new centers in California, its spread to Europe. The novelty of this movement, an almost religious exercise based on the scientific ethos, is related to the peculiar conditions of the last quarter century. The movement has acquired its own mythos. Dr. Back examines the interplay of the conflicting aims of self-expression and change, and shows how these contradictory aims have affected the ramifications of the movement in theory, in management, in recreation, and in education. Results emerging from studies on effects of sensitivity training indicate a recurrent pattern of great immediate emphasis followed by little permanent beneficial effect.

Finally, Beyond Words assesses the overall impact of the movement, its relation to science, its possible changes, and its portent as a symptom of the state of society.

Dr. Back examines the interplay of the conflicting aims of self-expression and change, and shows how these contradictory aims have affected the ramifications of the movement in theory, in management, in recreation, and in education.

KURT W. BACK is professor of sociology and psychiatry at Duke University.

A comprehensive case study of secondary school counseling as a developing profession. The author examines the growth of counseling, the characteristics of the contemporary counselor, the use of standardized tests, the changing orientation of the counselor from “educational advisor” to “therapist,” the influences of the institutional setting on counseling, and the impact of counseling on students and society.

DAVID J. ARMOR is assistant professor of social relations at Harvard University and director of the computation facility of the Laboratory of Social Relations.