Responses to Domestic Violence Public Service Ads: Memory, Attitudes, Affect, and Individual Differences

Public service ads (PSAs) are an increasingly visible part of efforts to decrease the occurrence and consequences of domestic violence. Like other advertising, domestic violence PSAs are designed to grab attention, influence attitudes, and enhance memory for ad content. Over the years, images in domestic violence PSAs have changed substantially; agencies have started using pictures that generate emotions - either vivid negative images (bruised faces or body parts), or positive images (smiling faces) that contrast with the negative text. It is not clear, however, how different types of ad images influence memory for the message and attitudes about domestic violence, and what role affect may play in such responses. Moreover, the extent to which individual differences (trauma history, posttraumatic distress - PTSD symptoms) influence outcomes is not known. In three studies with undergraduate and community samples, using methods ranging from psychophysiology to self-report, the impact of images on attitudes and memory for ad content are investigated, also considering affect and individual differences. Results indicate graphic negative images enhanced memory for ad content, are rated as more persuasive, and are more likely to compel the viewer to act. Affective responses to ads also differed based on image type, and in some cases, partially mediated the relationship between ads and outcomes. Trends in the data suggest further study of the role of individual differences (trauma history, PTSD symptoms) is needed. This research provides information specifically relevant to the design of domestic violence public service campaigns and broadly relevant to understanding the role of emotional responses and individual differences on outcomes associated with public service ads.

Difference Blindness vs. Bias Awareness: Why Law Firms with the Best of Intentions Have Failed to Create Diverse Partnerships

This Article uses the example of BigLaw firms to explore the challenges that many elite organizations face in providing equal opportunity to their workers. Despite good intentions and the investment of significant resources, large law firms have been consistently unable to deliver diverse partnership structures - especially in more senior positions of power. Building on implicit and institutional bias scholarship and on successful approaches described in the organizational behavior literature, we argue that a significant barrier to systemic diversity at the law firm partnership level has been, paradoxically, the insistence on difference blindness standards that seek to evaluate each person on their individual merit. While powerful in dismantling intentional discrimination, these standards rely on an assumption that lawyers are, and have the power to act as, atomistic individuals - a dangerous assumption that has been disproven consistently by the literature establishing the continuing and powerful influence of implicit and institutional bias. Accordingly, difference blindness, which holds all lawyers accountable to seemingly neutral standards, disproportionately disadvantages diverse populations and normalizes the dominance of certain actors - here, white men - by creating the illusion that success or failure depends upon individual rather than structural constraints. In contrast, we argue that a bias awareness approach that encourages identity awareness and a relational framework is a more promising way to promote equality, equity, and inclusion.

An Introduction to Conservation Easements in the United States: A Simple Concept and a Complicated Mosaic of Law

The idea of a conservation easement – restrictions on the development and use of land designed to protect the land’s conservation or historic values – can be relatively easily understood. More significant and more challenging is the complex body of state and federal laws that shapes the creation, funding, tax treatment, enforcement, modification, and termination of conservation easements. The explosion in the number of conservation easements over the past four decades has made them one of the most popular land protection mechanisms in the United States. The National Conservation Easement Database estimates that the total number of acres encumbered by conservation easements exceeds 40 million.Because conservation easements are both novel and ubiquitous, understanding how they actual work is essential for practicing lawyers, policymakers, land trust professionals, and students of conservation. This article provides a “quick tour” through some of the most important aspects of the developing mosaic of conservation easement law. It gives the reader a sense of the complex inter-jurisdictional dynamics that shape conservation transactions and disputes about conservation easements. Professors of property law, environmental law, tax law, and environmental studies who wish to cover conservation easements in the context of a more general course can use the article to provide their students with a broad but comprehensive overview of the relevant legal and policy issues.