Weibling Project News

LIVE STREAM of Program of Excellence Conference on Justice, Conflict, and Wellbeing

s-lwylie1 — Mon, 28 Nov 2011 21:00:14 +0000

To view live streaming of the Program of Excellence Conference on Justice, Conflict, and Well-being, please click here:

http://real.unl.edu/live

If you would like to email questions for any of the speakers, please email:

poeconference@gmail.com

Program of Excellence Conference, Nebraska College of Law

s-lwylie1 — Wed, 02 Nov 2011 16:49:50 +0000

Justice, Conflict, and Wellbeing: Interdisciplinary Work in Social Sciences and the Law

Program of Excellence

November 30- December 2, 2011, University of Nebraska College of Law, Lincoln, Nebraska

The UNL Law-Psychology Program is pleased to host its seventh conference on important topics in psychology and law, funded by a UNL Program of Excellence award. This conference consists of three substantive areas, each evaluating how the law currently protects people from discrimination with different levels of established protection. Speakers will present empirical approaches to the issues in question, address the behavioral assumptions that make up an area of law, and analyze the issues from legal, psychology, and public policy perspectives.

Roundtable discussions:

These “brainstorming” sessions will elaborate on issues raised by the papers presented throughout the conference. Discussions will be facilitated by UNL Law-Psychology faculty and the visiting participants who speak on the topics.

Schedule:

Wednesday, November 30

9:15 – 9:30

Welcoming

9:30-10:00 Introduction

Dr. Richard Wiener & Dr. Brian Bornstein, University of Nebraska-Lincoln

Session I: Legitimacy, Authority, and Discrimination

10:00 – 11:00

Dr. Brian Bornstein, Dr. Sarah J. Gervais, Hannah L. Dietrich, & Justin Escamilla, University of Nebraska-Lincoln; “All Else Being Equal: Overcoming the Egalitarian Norm.”

11:00 – 11:15

Morning Break

11:15– 12:15

Dr. John Scott, University of California, Davis;

“Is Equality a Distributive Justice Principle?”

12:15 – 1:45

Lunch at law school & Roundtable Discussion

1:45 – 2:45

Dr. Richard Wiener, University of Nebraska-Lincoln; “A Theory of Hostile Environments: The Roles of Objectification and Perspective Taking”

2:45 – 3:00

Afternoon Break

3:00 – 4:00

Dr. Lee Budesheim, Creighton University; “What Is Objectification and How and When Is It Harmful?”

4:00-5:00 Roundtable Discussion

5:15

Reception at the East Union

___________________________________

Thursday, December 1

Session II: Justice and Conflict Involving People with Mental Illness

9:00 – 10:00

Professor David Wexler, University of Arizona; “That’s what friends are for: mentors, LAP lawyers, and clients with mental illness.”

10:00 – 11:00

Dr. William Spaulding, University of Nebraska-Lincoln; “Therapeutic Jurisprudence: A View from the Trenches.”

11:00 – 11:30

Morning Break

11:30 – 12:30

Dr. Robert Schopp, University of Nebraska-Lincoln; “Mental Illness, Dangerousness, and Police Power Interventions in Pursuit of Justice and Well- Being.”

12:30 – 2:00

Lunch at law school & Roundtable Discussion

Session III: Political Conflict, Policy Solutions, and Citizens’ Wellbeing

2:00 – 3:00

Dr. Patrice McMahon, University of Nebraska-Lincoln; “From Adjudication to Aftermath: A Comparative Assessment of the Impact of the ICTY on the Balkans.”

3:00 – 4:00

Dr. Jelena Subotic, Georgia State University; “Complexity of Accountability for Mass Atrocity.”

4:00 – 4:15

Afternoon Break

4:15-5:15

Roundtable Discussion

___________________________________

Friday, December 2

Session IV: Justice Outside of Court: Alternative Dispute Resolution

8:30 – 9:30

Professor Kristen Blankley, University of Nebraska-Lincoln; “Taming the Wild West of Arbitration Ethics.”

9:30 – 9:45

Morning Break

9:45 – 10:45

Professor Maureen Weston, Pepperdine University School of Law; “The Public Cost of Private Justice.”

10:45 – 11:45

Roundtable Discussion

11:45 – 1:00

Lunch

Session V: Bringing Wellbeing to Children in Conflict

1:00 – 2:00

Dr. Anthony Pellegrini, University of Minnesota; “Peer Interaction, Adult Supervision, and

Conflict: The Baby and the Bathwater.”

2:00 – 3:00

Dr. Beth Doll and Susan Churchill, University of Nebraska-Lincoln; “Playground Conflicts: Everyday Opportunities for Children to Master Conflict Management.”

3:00 – 3:15

Afternoon break

3:15 – 4:15

Roundtable Discussion

Update to SPSP Pre-Conference in Psychology and Law

s-lwylie1 — Wed, 02 Nov 2011 12:38:00 +0000

UPDATE AND REMINDER

NEW SPSP PRE-CONFERENCE IN SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY AND LAW.

WE HAVE UPDATED OUR SPEAKER LIST AND ADDED DAN SIMON FROM UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA.

The University of Nebraska/Lincoln Law and Psychology Program invites you to attend the Social Psychology and Law pre-conference at SPSP 2012, to be held at the San Diego Convention Center on Thursday, January 26, 2012, between the hours of 8:00 AM and 4:30 PM.

The focus of this pre-conference will be current and future directions in social psychology and law. The individuals that are confirmed speakers are at the forefront of the social psychology of eyewitness research, jury research, and studies of discrimination in the law:

David Dunning, Chris Meissner, Steve Clark, Neil Vidmar, Jennifer Robbenolt, Gene Borgida, Dan Simon,Rich Wiener, and Sarah Gervais

The pre-conference will also include a poster session. The attached flier and our website provide more information, including instructions on how to submit a poster presentation.

The website address is:

https://sites.google.com/site/socialpsychologyandlaw/

Registration for the pre-conference began on October 1. Poster proposals are due December 1 but will be accepted on a rolling basis so submit your proposal soon!

If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Hope to see you in San Diego!

Rich Wiener and Sarah Gervais

Dr. Richard Wiener and Dr. Sarah Gervais receive NSF grant

s-lwylie1 — Fri, 16 Sep 2011 17:29:04 +0000

Two Weibling Staff members, Dr. Richard Wiener and Dr. Sarah Gervais recently received a grant from the National Science foundation to study how experiencers, observers, and detached community members view sexual objectification in workplace environments. The goal of the project is to learn when sexual objectification goes beyond socially inappropriate conduct and becomes hostile work environment harassment under the law. To accomplish this, the research applies a psycholegal framework to examine the effects of objectifying gazes that male workers direct toward female coworkers on judgments of sexual harassment, emotional reactions, and work performance for people who experience the objectifying gaze (e.g., potential complainants). In addition, it tests differences between the experiencers and people who observe the alleged harassment (e.g., co-workers and witnesses), people who predict the potential impact of the objectifying gaze from indirect evidence of it (e.g., judges and juries).

Preliminary work showed that predictors expect experiencers to report more sexual harassment, more negative emotions, and more performance decrements than experiencers of objectifying gazes actually do report. The research relies on a model of legal decision-making, sexual objectification, affective forecasting, the roles of pervasiveness and severity of the objectifying gaze on sexual harassment judgments, emotions, and performance, Specifically, the research addresses: 1) How severe or pervasive must sexual misconduct be to trigger reactions among complainants, witnesses, and judges and juries to satisfy the legal requirements of hostile work environment sexual harassment? 2) Do different levels of experienced and anticipated emotion explain these reactions? 3) What are the differences in reactions between potential complainants, witnesses, and juries/judges? To examine these questions, a coordinated set of 3 experimental studies in which student and community participants experience, observe, and predict the impact of objectifying gazes, which vary in severity and pervasiveness, will test the effects of the gaze on sexual harassment judgments, emotions, and work performance.

This work has the potential to generate new knowledge with theoretical and practical significance. The findings will explain how the objectifying gaze affects sexual harassment perceptions, emotions, and work performance from the perspectives of complainants, potential witness, and judges, jurors, and mediators. It also provides a model and potential intervention to explain and reduce the differences between these entities.