Strong party discipline is a core feature of Westminster parliamentary systems. Parties typically compel Members of Parliament (MPs) to support the party position regardless of MPs' individual preferences. Rebellion, however, does occur. Using an original dataset of MP votes and speeches in the British House of Commons from 1992 to 2015, coupled with new estimations of MPs' ideological positions within their party, we find evidence that MPs use rebellion to strategically differentiate themselves from their party. The strategy that MPs employ is contingent upon an interaction of ideological extremity with party control of government. Extremists are loyal when their party is in the opposition, but these same extremists become more likely to rebel when their party controls government. Additionally, they emphasize their rebellion through speeches. Existing models of rebellion and party discipline do not account for government agenda control and do not explain these patterns.
Research on judicial behavior has yet to systematically examine the extent to which ideology affects voting behavior outside of rights-based issues. This study explores the predictive effect of judicial ideology on judicial votes in a country without a bill of rights: Australia. We develop an ex ante measure of judicial ideology and use original data on every Australian High Court decision between 1995 and 2019 to test whether, and in which types of cases, votes of Australia’s justices align with their ideology. The results show that ex ante ideology is predictive of voting behavior, regardless of policy area.
The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that: • a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.
The prevalence of gambling harm among active duty military personnel is a largely unexplored topic. With different forms of social gambling often found within (or in close proximity to) military bases around the world, understanding the extent of gambling activities and consequent harms occurring within military contexts warrants further attention. This review aims to identify, describe and thematically synthesise published literature on gambling harm and related issues among active duty military personnel. Scoping review methods were applied in order to understand this relatively under-researched population and understand appropriate avenues for future research. A systematic multi-database text word search, incorporating search results from Scopus, Pubmed, Web of Science, PsychInfo, and the Journal Military Medicine, was conducted. A total of 11 sources met inclusion criteria, all originating from the United States of America. The results suggest a distinct gap in the current international literature on this topic. Despite gambling's long and colourful association with defence downtime, research into gambling harm prevalence rates in relation to what could be considered a high-risk group is limited. Findings reveal that strategies to identify and address gambling harm within this population are severely lacking from the published literature and non-existent outside North America. Implications for understanding and addressing gambling harm among active duty personnel and directions for future research are discussed.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.