An Information Theoretic Approach to Measurement of Spatial Inequality

In this paper we present some quantitative indices for measuring and comparing levels of inequality in discrete spatial distributions. The indices presented are based on the Kullback Information Measure which we consider to be the most general. In the final section of the paper the indices are applied to measure inequality in per capita income and certain categories of employment distribution in Ireland. The results indicate a tendency towards increasing uniformity in the spatial distribution of per capita incomes and employment opportunities

An Information Theoretic Approach to Measurement of Spatial Inequality

In this paper we present some quantitative indices for measuring and comparing levels of inequality in discrete spatial distributions. The indices presented are based on the Kullback Information Measure which we consider to be the most general. In the final section of the paper the indices are applied to measure inequality in per capita income and certain categories of employment distribution in Ireland. The results indicate a tendency towards increasing uniformity in the spatial distribution of per capita incomes and employment opportunities

An Information Theoretic Approach to Measurement of Spatial Inequality

In this paper we present some quantitative indices for measuring and comparing levels of inequality in discrete spatial distributions. The indices presented are based on the Kullback Information Measure which we consider to be the most general. In the final section of the paper the indices are applied to measure inequality in per capita income and certain categories of employment distribution in Ireland. The results indicate a tendency towards increasing uniformity in the spatial distribution of per capita incomes and employment opportunities

Judicial intervention in court cases involving witnesses with and without learning disabilities

Purpose: This paper outlines the extent and nature of judicial interventions in court cases involving witnesses with learning disabilities and from the general population. Method: Court transcripts, mainly concerning serious sexual crime, were obtained from a total of 32 witnesses, 16 involving people with learning disabilities and 16 involving people from the general population. Each intervention made by a judge was documented and coded into one of three categories: interactions with witnesses, interactions with lawyers, and interactions with the jury. Results: No significant differences were found between the judicial treatment of witnesses with learning disabilities and those from the general population. In particular, judges did not intervene more frequently tosimplify lawyers' questions, call breaks, suggest methods by which a witness could reply, ask lawyers to simplify their questions, prevent oppression of the witness and move the lawyer on, and ensure the witness could understand the question. Conclusions: The implications of the findings are that judges should intervene, as they are legally entitled, to ensure that witnesses with and without learning disabilities give the most complete and accurate evidence possible