Do Negative Consumption Experiences Hurt Manufacturers or Retailers? The Influence of Reasoning Style on Consumer Blame Attributions and Purchase Intention

Negative consumption experiences adversely influence consumer perceptions of manufacturers and retailers. The author theorizes and finds that analytical thinkers are more likely than holistic thinkers to attribute the cause of the negative consumption experience to the manufacturer, resulting in lower repurchase intention of the manufacturer brand. In contrast, holistic thinkers are more likely than analytical thinkers to attribute the cause of the negative consumption experience to the retailer, resulting in lower repurchase intention at the retailer. These findings are important to marketing managers at both ends of the marketing supply chain--manufacturers and retailers--who deal with consumers with diverse cultural backgrounds

A Re-Evaluation of the Privilege Against Adverse Spousal Testimony in the Light of Its Purpose

The recent development in American federal criminal evidence law to be examined and compared with English law in this paper, is a new evolutionary turn taken by the husband-wife privilege against adverse spousal testimony, manifest in the Supreme Court decision of Wyatt v. United States. The House of Lords, in Rumping v. D.P.P., just decided, suggests that the English spousal privileges might be susceptible of similar development

Causality and Association: The Statistical and Legal Approaches

This paper discusses different needs and approaches to establishing ``causation'' that are relevant in legal cases involving statistical input based on epidemiological (or more generally observational or population-based) information. We distinguish between three versions of ``cause'': the first involves negligence in providing or allowing exposure, the second involves ``cause'' as it is shown through a scientifically proved increased risk of an outcome from the exposure in a population, and the third considers ``cause'' as it might apply to an individual plaintiff based on the first two. The population-oriented ``cause'' is that commonly addressed by statisticians, and we propose a variation on the Bradford Hill approach to testing such causality in an observational framework, and discuss how such a systematic series of tests might be considered in a legal context. We review some current legal approaches to using probabilistic statements, and link these with the scientific methodology as developed here. In particular, we provide an approach both to the idea of individual outcomes being caused on a balance of probabilities, and to the idea of material contribution to such outcomes. Statistical terminology and legal usage of terms such as ``proof on the balance of probabilities'' or ``causation'' can easily become confused, largely due to similar language describing dissimilar concepts; we conclude, however, that a careful analysis can identify and separate those areas in which a legal decision alone is required and those areas in which scientific approaches are useful.Comment: Published in at http://dx.doi.org/10.1214/07-STS234 the Statistical Science (http://www.imstat.org/sts/) by the Institute of Mathematical Statistics (http://www.imstat.org

Cognitive apprenticeship : teaching the craft of reading, writing, and mathtematics

Includes bibliographical references (p. 25-27)This research was supported by the National Institute of Education under Contract no. US-NIE-C-400-81-0030 and the Office of Naval Research under Contract No. N00014-85-C-002