Cigarette smoking in young adults : the influence of the HTR2A T102C polymorphism and punishment sensitivity

Background: The C allele of a common polymorphism of the serotonin 2A receptor (HTR2A) gene, T102C, results in reduced synthesis of 5-HT2A receptors and has been associated with current smoking status in adults. The -1438A/G polymorphism, located in the regulatory region of this gene, is in linkage disequilibrium with T102C, and the A allele is associated with increased promoter activity and with smoking in adult males. We investigated the contributions of the HTR2A gene, chronic psychological stress, and impulsivity to the prediction of cigarette smoking status and dependence in young adults. Methods: T102C and -1438A/G genotyping was conducted on 132 healthy Caucasian young adults (47 smokers) who completed self-report measures of chronic stress, depressive symptoms, impulsive personality and cigarette use. Results: A logistic regression analysis of current cigarette smoker user status, after adjusting for gender, depressive symptom severity and chronic stress, indicated that the T102C TT genotype relative to the CC genotype (OR = 7.53), and lower punishment sensitivity (OR = 0.91) were each significant predictive risk factors. However, for number of cigarettes smoked, only lower punishment sensitivity was a significant predictor (OR = 0.81). Conclusions: These data indicate the importance of the T102C polymorphism to tobacco use but not number of cigarettes smoked for Caucasian young adults. Future studies should examine whether this is explained by effects of nicotine on the serotonin system. Lower punishment sensitivity increased risk of both smoking and of greater consumption, perhaps via a reduced sensitivity to cigarette health warnings and negative physiological effects.

The influence of sensitivity to reward and punishment, propensity for sensation seeking, depression, and anxiety on the risky behaviour of novice drivers : a path model

Young novice drivers are significantly more likely to be killed or injured in car crashes than older, experienced drivers. Graduated driver licensing (GDL), which allows the novice to gain driving experience under less-risky circumstances, has resulted in reduced crash incidence; however, the driver's psychological traits are ignored. This paper explores the relationships between gender, age, anxiety, depression, sensitivity to reward and punishment, sensation-seeking propensity, and risky driving. Participants were 761 young drivers aged 17–24 (M= 19.00, SD= 1.56) with a Provisional (intermediate) driver's licence who completed an online survey comprising socio-demographic questions, the Impulsive Sensation Seeking Scale, Kessler's Psychological Distress Scale, the Sensitivity to Punishment and Sensitivity to Reward Questionnaire, and the Behaviour of Young Novice Drivers Scale. Path analysis revealed depression, reward sensitivity, and sensation-seeking propensity predicted the self-reported risky behaviour of the young novice drivers. Gender was a moderator; and the anxiety level of female drivers also influenced their risky driving. Interventions do not directly consider the role of rewards and sensation seeking, or the young person's mental health. An approach that does take these variables into account may contribute to improved road safety outcomes for both young and older road users.

Mileage, car ownership, experience of punishment avoidance and the risky driving of young drivers

Objective: Young drivers are at greatest risk of injury or death from a car crash in the first six months of independent driving. In Queensland, the graduated driver licensing (GDL) program was extensively modified in July 2007 in order to reduce this risk. Increased mileage and car ownership have been found to play a role in risky driving, offences and crashes; however GDL programs typically do not consider these variables. In addition, young novice drivers’ experiences of punishment avoidance have not previously been examined. The paper explores the mileage (duration and distance), car ownership and punishment avoidance behaviour of young newly-licensed intermediate (Provisional) drivers and their relationship with risky driving, crashes and offences. Methods: Drivers (n = 1032) aged 17-19 years recruited from across Queensland for longitudinal research completed Survey 1 exploring pre-licence and Learner experiences and sociodemographic characteristics. Survey 2 explored the same variables with a subset of these drivers (n = 341) after they had completed their first six months of independent driving. Results: Most young drivers in Survey 2 reported owning a vehicle and paying attention to Police presence. Drivers who had their own car reported significantly greater mileage and more risky driving. Novices who drove more kilometres, spent more hours each week driving, or avoided actual and anticipated Police presence were more likely to report risky driving. These drivers were also more likely to report being detected by Police for a driving-related offence. The media, parents, friends and other drivers play a pivotal role in informing novices of on-road Police enforcement operations. Conclusions: GDL programs should incorporate education for the parent and novice driver regarding the increased risks associated with greater driving particularly where the novices own a vehicle. Parents should be encouraged to delay exclusive access to a vehicle for the novice driver. Parents should also consider whether their young novice will deliberately avoid Police if they tell them their location. This may reinforce not only the risky behaviour but also the young novice’s beliefs that their parents condone this behaviour.

Explorations into the Sociology of Criminal Justice and Punishment. Leaving the Modernist Project Behind

Law has been a close partner to sociology from its very beginning, and the partnership often has proven to be extremely prolific for sociology. Grand theories as well as vital conceptual tools can be counted among its offspring. Both disciplines share the common ground of socio-legal studies, which has developed into a nearly independent interdisciplinary enterprise where legal scholars and sociologists happily meander between the normative and the analytical. From the vast array of topics in the field of socio-legal studies I select the sociology of criminal justice and punishment in order to demonstrate the characteristics of this relationship. The partnership between sociology and law emerged as part of the modernization project in the 19th and 20th centuries, and the sociology of punishment was part of this endeavour. Rooted in a strong tradition of old (Durkheim) and new (Elias, Foucault) classics, recent developments in this field are leaving the idea of an `unproblematically modern punishment' (Whitman, 2005a) behind, and new fields of inquiry for comparative lawyers and sociologists are opening up.

Review : "A criminological imagination : essays on justice, punishment and discourse by Part Carlen"

There are four contributors to this review symposium. David Brown's review focuses on the questions of abolitionism that cut across much of Carlen's scholarship on punishment and prisons. Kerry Carrington's review attempts to articulate Pat Carlen's contributions to feminism, critque and crimnology, a selection of which is republished in the third scetion 'A criminological imgination'. Kelly Hannah-Moffat's review provides a succint but broad ranging analysis of Carlen's contributions to knowledge, politics and penal reform. Jo Phoenix takes Carlen's contributions to women, crim and scoial control as her main source of inspiration from this large body of work to review.

Roll the dice, rational agent : should extra-curial punishment mitigate an offender's sentence?

It was rugby league State of Origin night 2008 and a group of adults had descended upon a house in Eagleby, Brisbane to have some drinks and to celebrate the game. At 11pm that evening, Shane Thomas Davidson entered the bedroom of the homeowner’s 10-year-old son, TC. Davidson approached the bed and began to massage the boy’s penis under his clothing, which caused TC to wake. Davidson stated, ‘Show me how big your willy is and I’ll show you how big mine is’. TC refused the request and after a small period of time, left the bedroom and told his father what had happened...

Effective punishment experiences : the need for a more comprehensive approach to conceptualising behavioural punishers and reinforcers in a road safety context

Determining what consequences are likely to serve as effective punishment for any given behaviour is a complex task. This chapter focuses specifically on illegal road user behaviours and the mechanisms used to punish and deter them. Traffic law enforcement has traditionally used the threat and/or receipt of legal sanctions and penalties to deter illegal and risky behaviours. This process represents the use of positive punishment, one of the key behaviour modification mechanisms. Behaviour modification principles describe four types of reinforcers: positive and negative punishments and positive and negative reinforcements. The terms ‘positive’ and ‘negative’ are not used in an evaluative sense here. Rather, they represent the presence (positive) or absence (negative) of stimuli to promote behaviour change. Punishments aim to inhibit behaviour and reinforcements aim to encourage it. This chapter describes a variety of punishments and reinforcements that have been and could be used to modify illegal road user behaviours. In doing so, it draws on several theoretical perspectives that have defined behavioural reinforcement and punishment in different ways. Historically, the main theoretical approach used to deter risky road use has been classical deterrence theory which has focussed on the perceived certainty, severity and swiftness of penalties. Stafford and Warr (1993) extended the traditional deterrence principles to include the positive reinforcement concept of punishment avoidance. Evidence of the association between punishment avoidance experiences and behaviour has been established for a number of risky road user behaviours including drink driving, unlicensed driving, and speeding. We chose a novel way of assessing punishment avoidance by specifying two sub-constructs (detection evasion and punishment evasion). Another theorist, Akers, described the idea of competing reinforcers, termed differential reinforcement, within social learning theory (1977). Differential reinforcement describes a balance of reinforcements and punishments as influential on behaviour. This chapter describes comprehensive way of conceptualising a broad range of reinforcement and punishment concepts, consistent with Akers’ differential reinforcement concept, within a behaviour modification framework that incorporates deterrence principles. The efficacy of three theoretical perspectives to explain self-reported speeding among a sample of 833 Australian car drivers was examined. Results demonstrated that a broad range of variables predicted speeding including personal experiences of evading detection and punishment for speeding, intrinsic sensations, practical benefits expected from speeding, and an absence of punishing effects from being caught. Not surprisingly, being younger was also significantly related to more frequent speeding, although in a regression analysis, gender did not retain a significant influence once all punishment and reinforcement variables were entered. The implications for speed management, as well as road user behaviour modification more generally, are discussed in light of these findings. Overall, the findings reported in this chapter suggest that a more comprehensive approach is required to manage the behaviour of road users which does not rely solely on traditional legal penalties and sanctions.

Punishment and 'the People' : Rescuing Populism from its Critics

The term 'penal populism' is now reflexively used by criminologists to describe what many see as a dominant trend within penal policymaking in many western countries. The epithet 'populist' is used with no Jess frequency by media and other public commentators to refer (always pejoratively) to this or that political announcement, policy or style of political leadership, whether the context be specifically related to crime or some other arena of public affairs. In most accounts 'penal populism' (or 'populist punitiveness': Bottoms, 1995) is treated as a composite term. The two words are inseparably coupled and it is the penal that receives most of the detailed attention. As in more general political commentary, populism is tacitly understood as a negative and rather dangerous phenomenon, suggestive of manipulation, shallow-ness and demagoguery: in short, a corruption of normal, healthy democratic politics. As against such accounts, I want to suggest that debate about penal policymaking and its future -and particularly the prospects for more progressive policymaking in the area -would be assisted if populism was taken more seriously both conceptually and politically. This requires a decoupling of the concept of populism from what is habitually taken to be its punitive partner and that which defines its content. Currently the term is used without clear definition, let alone conceptual elaboration, to reference political pathology. Instead populism should be examined as a regular, meaningful dimension of contemporary political practice that has to be understood and engaged, not just denounced and extirpated. That is, I am seeking to make a case for bringing populism in from the despised margins to the centre of political practice and reflection. I will also briefly consider some of the implications this may have for penal politics specifically.