Is citizenship simply a legal status or does it describe a sense of belonging to a national community? For Arab Americans, these questions took on new urgency after 9/11, as the cultural prejudices that have often marginalized their community came to a head. Citizenship and Crisis reveals that, despite an ever-shifting definition of citizenship and the ease with which it can be questioned in times of national crisis, the Arab communities of metropolitan Detroit continue to thrive. A groundbreaking study of social life, religious practice, cultural values, and political views among Detroit Arabs after 9/11, Citizenship and Crisis argues that contemporary Arab American citizenship and identity have been shaped by the chronic tension between social inclusion and exclusion that has been central to this population’s experience in America.

According to the landmark Detroit Arab American Study, which surveyed more than 1,000 Arab Americans and is the focus of this book, Arabs express pride in being American at rates higher than the general population. In nine wide-ranging essays, the authors of Citizenship and Crisis argue that the 9/11 backlash did not substantially transform the Arab community in Detroit, nor did it alter the identities that prevail there. The city’s Arabs are now receiving more mainstream institutional, educational, and political support than ever before, but they remain a constituency defined as essentially foreign. The authors explore the role of religion in cultural integration and identity formation, showing that Arab Muslims feel more alienated from the mainstream than Arab Christians do. Arab Americans adhere more strongly to traditional values than do other Detroit residents, regardless of religion. Active participants in the religious and cultural life of the Arab American community attain higher levels of education and income, yet assimilation to the American mainstream remains important for achieving enduring social and political gains. The contradictions and dangers of being Arab and American are keenly felt in Detroit, but even when Arab Americans oppose U.S. policies, they express more confidence in U.S. institutions than do non-Arabs in the general population.

The Arabs of greater Detroit, whether native-born, naturalized, or permanent residents, are part of a political and historical landscape that limits how, when, and to what extent they can call themselves American. When analyzed against this complex backdrop, the results of The Detroit Arab American Study demonstrate that the pervasive notion in American society that Arabs are not like “us” is simply inaccurate. Citizenship and Crisis makes a rigorous and impassioned argument for putting to rest this exhausted cultural and political stereotype.

The Detroit Arab American Study is a collaboration between the University of Michigan’s Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan, Dearborn, and an advisory panel of community representatives from more than twenty secular, religious, and social service organizations. The group is led by WAYNE BAKER, SALLY HOWELL, ANN CHIH LIN, ANDREW SHRYOCK, and MARK TESSLER of the University of Michigan; AMANEY JAMAL of Princeton University; and RON STOCKTON of the University of Michigan, Dearborn.

Policy analysis, as a practical matter, is hardly new. Throughout history, rulers have sought advice from priests or sages, and monarchs have conferred with counselors. The emergence of empirical social research in the nineteenth century laid the groundwork for policy advice that was more than an idiosyncratic political exercise, but it was not until well into this century that the systematic examination of policy issues became feasible.

Advice and Consent traces the recent course of the "policy sciences," a term coined in 1951 to describe an analytic approach that draws on political science, sociology, law, economics, psychology, and operations research to examine specific social problems in context. Peter deLeon's unique contribution is to delineate two separate but related currents in the development of the policy sciences: first, the evolution of intellectual tools for analysis ("advice"); and second, the evolution of a perceived need for policy research as prompted by events such as the war on poverty ("consent").

Peter deLeon's concise and literate account of how these two trends shaped the policy sciences and affected each other clarifies the present state of policy research, explores its failure to realize fully its ideals, and frames the challenges facing the policy sciences as they struggle to complete their transformation from academic fancy to institutional fact.

PETER DELEON is assistant professor of public policy at the Graduate School of Public Affairs, University of Colorado, Denver, and advisor to several European policy research centers.

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.

More and more young men and women today are taking longer and having more difficulty making a successful transition to adulthood.  They are staying in school longer, having a harder time finding steady employment at jobs that provide health insurance, and are not marrying and having children until much later in life than their parents did. In The Price of Independence, a roster of distinguished experts diagnose the extent and causes of these trends.

Observers of social trends have speculated on the economic changes that may be delaying the transition to adulthood—from worsening job opportunities to mounting student debt and higher housing costs—but few have offered empirical evidence to back up their claims. The Price of Independence represents the first significant analysis of these economic explanations, charting the evolving life circumstances of eighteen to thirty-five year-olds over the last few decades. Lisa Bell, Gary Burtless, Janet Gornick, and Timothy M. Smeeding show that the earnings of young workers in the United States and a number of industrialized countries have declined relative to the cost of supporting a family, which may explain their protracted dependence. In addition, Henry Farber finds that job stability for young male workers has dropped over the last generation. But while economic factors have some influence on young people’s transitions to adulthood, The Price of Independence shows that changes in the economic climate can not account for the magnitude of the societal shift in the timing of independent living, marriage, and childbearing. Aaron Yelowitz debunks the myth that steep housing prices are forcing the young to live at home—housing costs actually fell between 1980 and 2000 once lower interest rates and tax subsidies are taken into account. And Ngina Chiteji reveals that average student loan debt is only $3,500 per household. The trend toward starting careers and families later appears to have more to do with changing social norms, as well as policies that have broadened access to higher education, than with changes in the economy.

For better or worse, the current generation is redefining the nature and boundaries of  what it means to be a young adult. The Price of Independence documents just how dramatically the modern lifecycle has changed and offers evidence as an antidote to much of the conventional wisdom about these social changes.

SHELDON DANZIGER is Henry J. Meyer Distinguished University Professor of Public Policy and codirector of the National Poverty Center at the Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy at the University of Michigan.

CECILIA ELENA ROUSE is the Theodore A. Wells  Professor of Economics and Public Affairs at Princeton University.

CONTRIBUTORS: Sofya Aptekar, Lisa Bell, Gary Burtless, Ngina S. Chiteji, Henry S. Farber,  Maria D. Fitzpatrick,  Janet Gornick, Melanie Guldi,  Carolyn J. Hill,  Harry Holzer, Helen Levy, Katherine Newman, Marianne E. Page,  Steven Raphael,  Timothy M. Smeeding,  Ann Huff Stevens,  Sarah E. Turner,  Aaron S. Yelowitz.

A Volume in the Multi-City Study of Urban Inequality

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.

The 9/11 terrorist attacks opened America’s eyes to a frightening world of enemies surrounding us. But have our eyes opened wide enough to see how our experiences compare with other nations’ efforts to confront and prevent terrorism? Other democracies have long histories of confronting both international and domestic terrorism. Some have undertaken progressively more stringent counterterrorist measures in the name of national security and the safety of citizens. The Consequences of Counterterrorism examines the political costs and challenges democratic governments face in confronting terrorism.

Using historical and comparative perspectives, The Consequences of Counterterrorism presents thematic analyses as well as case studies of Britain, France, Germany, Spain, Japan, and Israel. Contributor John Finn compares post-9/11 antiterrorism legislation in the United States, Europe, Canada, and India to demonstrate the effects of hastily drawn policies on civil liberties and constitutional norms. Chantal de Jonge Oudraat and Jean-Luc Marret assert that terrorist designation lists are more widespread internationally than ever before. The authors examine why governments and international organizations use such lists, how they work, and why they are ineffective tools. Gallya Lahav shows how immigration policy has become inextricably linked to security in the EU and compares the European fear of internal threats to the American fear of external ones.

A chapter by Dirk Haubrich explains variation in the British government’s willingness to compromise democratic principles according to different threats. In his look at Spain and Northern Ireland, Rogelio Alonso asserts that restricting the rights of those who perpetrate ethnonationalist violence may be acceptable in order to protect the rights of citizens who are victims of such violence. Jeremy Shapiro considers how the French response to terrorist threats has become more coercive during the last fifty years. Israel’s “war model” of counterterrorism has failed, Ami Pedahzur and Arie Perliger argue, and is largely the result of the military elite’s influence on state institutions. Giovanni Cappocia explains how Germany has protected basic norms and institutions. In contrast, David Leheny stresses the significance of change in Japan’s policies.

Preventing and countering terrorism is now a key policy priority for many liberal democratic states. As The Consequences of Counterterrorism makes clear, counterterrorist policies have the potential to undermine the democratic principles, institutions, and processes they seek to preserve.

MARTHA CRENSHAW is senior fellow at the Center for International Security and Cooperation and Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies at Stanford University, and a professor of political science by courtesy, as well as professor of government, emerita, at Wesleyan University.

CONTRIBUTORS: Rogelio Alonso, Giovanni Capoccia, Martha Crenshaw, Chantal de Jonge Oudraat, John E. Finn, Dirk Haubrich, Gallya Lahav, David Leheny, Jean-Luc Marret, Ami Pedahzur, Arie Perliger, and Jeremy Shapiro.

Praise for the first edition:

“The Handbook is a comprehensive treatment of literature synthesis and provides practical advice for anyone deep in the throes of, just teetering on the brink of, or attempting to decipher a meta-analysis. Given the expanding application and importance of literature synthesis, understanding both its strengths and weaknesses is essential for its practitioners and consumers. This volume is a good beginning for those who wish to gain that understanding.” —Chance

“Meta-analysis, as the statistical analysis of a large collection of results from individual studies is called, has now achieved a status of respectability in medicine. This respectability, when combined with the slight hint of mystique that sometimes surrounds meta-analysis, ensures that results of studies that use it are treated with the respect they deserve….The Handbook of Research Synthesis is one of the most important publications in this subject both as a definitive reference book and a practical manual.”—British Medical Journal


When the first edition of The Handbook of Research Synthesis was published in 1994, it quickly became the definitive reference for researchers conducting meta-analyses of existing research in both the social and biological sciences. In this fully revised second edition, editors Harris Cooper, Larry Hedges, and Jeff Valentine present updated versions of the Handbook’s classic chapters, as well as entirely new sections reporting on the most recent, cutting-edge developments in the field.

Research synthesis is the practice of systematically distilling and integrating data from a variety of sources in order to draw more reliable conclusions about a given question or topic. The Handbook of Research Synthesis and Meta-Analysis draws upon years of groundbreaking advances that have transformed research synthesis from a narrative craft into an important scientific process in its own right. Cooper, Hedges, and Valentine have assembled leading authorities in the field to guide the reader through every stage of the research synthesis process—problem formulation, literature search and evaluation, statistical integration, and report preparation. The Handbook of Research Synthesis and Meta-Analysis incorporates state-of-the-art techniques from all quantitative synthesis traditions. Distilling a vast technical literature and many informal sources, the Handbook provides a portfolio of the most effective solutions to the problems of quantitative data integration. Among the statistical issues addressed by the authors are the synthesis of non-independent data sets, fixed and random effects methods, the performance of sensitivity analyses and model assessments, and the problem of missing data.

The Handbook of Research Synthesis and Meta-Analysis also provides a rich treatment of the non-statistical aspects of research synthesis. Topics include searching the literature, and developing schemes for gathering information from study reports. Those engaged in research synthesis will also find useful advice on how tables, graphs, and narration can be used to provide the most meaningful communication of the results of research synthesis. In addition, the editors address the potentials and limitations of research synthesis, and its future directions.

The past decade has been a period of enormous growth in the field of research synthesis. The second edition Handbook thoroughly revises original chapters to assure that the volume remains the most authoritative source of information for researchers undertaking meta-analysis today. In response to the increasing use of research synthesis in the formation of public policy, the second edition includes a new chapter on both the strengths and limitations of research synthesis in policy debates and decisions. Another new chapter looks at computing effect sizes and standard errors from clustered data, such as schools or clinics. Authors also discuss updated techniques for locating hard-to-find “fugitive” literature, ways of systematically assessing the quality of a study, and progress in statistical methods for detecting and estimating the effects of publication bias.

The Handbook of Research Synthesis and Meta-Analysis is an illuminating compilation of practical instruction, theory, and problem solving. This unique volume offers the reader comprehensive instruction in the skills necessary to conduct powerful research syntheses meeting the highest standards of objectivity. The significant developments included in the second edition will ensure that the Handbook remains the premier text on research synthesis for years to come.

HARRIS COOPER is professor of psychology and neuroscience at Duke University.

LARRY V. HEDGES is Board of Trustees Professor of Statistics and Social Policy, and Faculty Fellow, Institute for Policy Research, Northwestern University.

JEFFREY C. VALENTINE is assistant professor, Department of Educational and Counseling Psychology, College of Education and Human Development, University of Louisville.

CONTRIBUTORS: Pam M. Baxter, Betsy Jane Becker, Jesse A. Berlin, Michael Borenstein, Geoffrey D. Borman, Brad J. Bushman, Mike Clarke, Thomas D. Cook, Harris Cooper, David S. Cordray, Alice H. Eagly, Joseph L. Fleiss, Leon J. Gleser, Joel B. Greenhouse, Jeffrey A. Grigg, C. Keith Haddock, Larry V. Hedges, Sally Hopewell, Satish Iyengar, Spyros Konstantopoulos, Huy Le, Mark W. Lipsey, Georg E. Matt, Paul Morphy, Ingram Olkin, Robert G. Orwin, Therese D. Pigott, Stephen W. Raudenbush, Jeffrey G. Reed, Hannah R. Rothstein, Frank L. Schmidt, William R. Shadish, Alex J. Sutton, Jeffrey C. Valentine, Jack L. Vevea, Morgan C. Wang, Howard D. White, David B. Wilson, and Wendy Wood.

Some social theorists claim that trust is necessary for the smooth functioning of a democratic society. Yet many recent surveys suggest that trust is on the wane in the United States. Does this foreshadow trouble for the nation? In Cooperation Without Trust? Karen Cook, Russell Hardin, and Margaret Levi argue that a society can function well in the absence of trust. Though trust is a useful element in many kinds of relationships, they contend that mutually beneficial cooperative relationships can take place without it.

Cooperation Without Trust? employs a wide range of examples illustrating how parties use mechanisms other than trust to secure cooperation. Concerns about one’s reputation, for example, could keep a person in a small community from breaching agreements. State enforcement of contracts ensures that business partners need not trust one another in order to trade. Similarly, monitoring worker behavior permits an employer to vest great responsibility in an employee without necessarily trusting that person. Cook, Hardin, and Levi discuss other mechanisms for facilitating cooperation absent trust, such as the self-regulation of professional societies, management compensation schemes, and social capital networks. In fact, the authors argue that a lack of trust—or even outright distrust—may in many circumstances be more beneficial in creating cooperation. Lack of trust motivates people to reduce risks and establish institutions that promote cooperation. A stout distrust of government prompted America’s founding fathers to establish a system in which leaders are highly accountable to their constituents, and in which checks and balances keep the behavior of government officials in line with the public will. Such institutional mechanisms are generally more dependable in securing cooperation than simple faith in the trustworthiness of others.

Cooperation Without Trust? suggests that trust may be a complement to governing institutions, not a substitute for them. Whether or not the decline in trust documented by social surveys actually indicates an erosion of trust in everyday situations, this book argues that society is not in peril. Even if we were a less trusting society, that would not mean we are a less functional one.

KAREN S. COOK is the Ray Lyman Wilbur Professor of Sociology and senior associate dean of social sciences at Stanford University.

RUSSELL HARDIN is professor of politics at New York University.

MARGARET LEVI is Jere L. Bacharach Professor of International Studies in the Department of Political Science, University of Washington, Seattle.

A Volume in the Russell Sage Foundation Series on Trust