Chapter 8 studies what we can do so that people do not fall into traps of trying to believe in conspiracy theories that resist falsification. Belief in conspiracy theories often starts by looking at important societal authorities and a certain amount of suspicion about these authorities. The chapter examines when conspiracy thinking feels so good that people exaggerate their levels of suspicion of what is actually going on in society. The chapter also explains how the online quality of our modern way of living tends to amplify levels of suspicion and the ease with which conspiracy theories are spread. The chapter distinguishes between three different motivations that often are equated with each other, yet that drive conspiracy thinking in different ways. One important motivation is epistemic and concerns people trying to make sense of what is going on in their world. Another important motivation is existential and concerns people trying to deal with threats in their life. Yet another motivation concerns group identification. This includes people wanting to belong to unique groups that give them a sense of belonging. The three motivations point out different ways of trying to intervene when people start falling for exaggerated suspicion and conspiracy thoughts.

New scientific developments, addressed throughout this book, which challenge the SBS hypothesis present challenges for courts that relied upon the outdated and unchallenged hypothesis to convict caregivers of child abuse. The law is notoriously slow to respond to scientific advances, and its strong fealty to finality makes reopening old convictions, even those that are dependent on flawed science, procedurally difficult. This chapter addresses the challenges posed for courts by shifting SBS science and analyses the bases, and slowly developing movement to reopen old SBS convictions based upon outdated and flawed science.

Concerns of incoherence surrounding investor-state decisions have been widely discussed by scholars over the past several years and have moreover been overwhelmingly raised by state delegations during the UNCITRAL Working Group III discussions on investor-state dispute settlement reform. In the coda, the discussion is briefly brought back to its beginnings and the topic of investor-state dispute settlement reform. Are there any conclusions in relation to reform that may usefully be drawn from the book’s discussion? The coda argues that states may be required to reframe and recontextualise their understanding of the concept of coherence in light of the book’s overall analysis. In so doing, they may also be required to address coherence from the ‘bottom-up’ rather than the ‘top-down’.

The Attraction emotions are reactions of liking or disliking objects (or aspects of objects) resulting from an object’s appeal (or lack thereof). Appeal, in turn, depends on tastes, which in contrast to goals and standards, tend to be unanalyzable, Hence, the Attraction emotions are the least cognitively complex of all emotions. Tastes are treated broadly and include attitudes and preferences, and the notion of an object is also broad, including anything that is evaluated qua object, meaning that even events or agents’ actions can be viewed as objects. Although issues pertaining to aesthetic judgment are raised, they are not the focus of Attraction emotions. The Attraction emotion identified depends on whether an object is evaluated as being appealing or unappealing and whether it is viewed as itself being capable of emotion. Crossing these dimensions leads to four emotion types: “Affection” and “Enmity” emotions, which pertain to emotion-capable (generally animate) objects, and “Appreciation” and “Distaste” emotions, which pertain to emotion-incapable (generally inanimate) objects.

Chapter 7 conducts part two of the deeper dive into the new regulations, but here the focus is on the changes made to the investigation and adjudication of sexual assault. The chapter explains the ways in which the new procedures differ from those under the 2011 Dear Colleague Letter, and how they better protect complainants and the accused. In considering the fairness of the new procedures, the chapter compares them to the consensus recommendations of the 2017 ABA Criminal Justice Section Task Force on Campus Due Process and Victim Protection. Along the way, suggestions are offered for how schools can implement the new regulations in a way that is compliant with those regulations but better protects the rights of victims and the accused.

Chapter 3 investigates the problematic beginnings of the 2011 Dear Colleague Letter (DCL) issued by the Department of Education Office for Civil Rights (OCR) under President Obama. It explaina how the DCL misrepresented existing data, violated the Administrative Procedure Act by changing the law without going through notice and comment, and flouted existing norms. In the process, the chapter provides an in-depth discussion of the changes brought about by the DCL, including mandating a lower standard of proof in sexual assault hearings.

Chapter 14 covers the provision on dispute settlement and consultations in the Agreement on Safeguards. This provision follows the general dispute settlement rules and procedures contained in the WTO Dispute Settlement Understanding and Articles XXII and XXIII of the GATT 1994. It is technically the legal basis for the handling of disputes on the application of the Agreement on Safeguards. Chapter 14 explains how the dispute settlement process operates at its different stages and the usual issues that arise in the conduct of safeguard disputes. The chapter also provides statistics on the performance of the WTO dispute settlement mechanism in respect of safeguard investigations and safeguard measures. It provides practical considerations derived from the experience of the author as an active litigant in dispute settlement proceedings.

Ecclesiastical courts were rightly seen by nineteenth-century thinkers as a closed shop, a court system separate from the general court system which had its own proctors, advocates and judges. These courts had jurisdiction over the laity in a number of matters such as marriage, burial and probate of wills, though this changed during the century. The chapter describes the attempts at reform, and the difficulties with discipline of the laity as well as clergy that were addressed in the course of legislative change. Appeal lay with the secular courts and here too lay problems, where the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council served as the final court of appeal

In chapter 6, we discussed what an advertising creative idea is and how to increase the probability of finding the big idea. But what happens after that? Ideally, we should pre-test the idea (see chapter 12). But to do so, we need to first create the ad, sometimes called ‘execution’. Things can still go wrong if the creative idea is not well executed, no matter how good it is. For instance, if the copy is difficult to comprehend, the humour is irrelevant, or the celebrity chosen does not fit the brand and so on. The aim of this chapter is to discuss how executional tactics can be used effectively. The discussion centres on what creative execution means and explains the difference between creative execution and the creative idea, stressing that executions must be guided by the creative idea. Under some circumstances, the creative execution is also the creative idea. We will also discuss different types of executional tactics and how to use them properly.

Chapter 5 explains why in the eyes of many status-quo defenders, the quick and decisive defeat of Communists’ early efforts to replicate the Russian Revolution did not reliably guarantee sociopolitical stability. The main reasons were that Communism managed to survive in Russia and that Lenin’s disciples eagerly proselytized, organized, and agitated across the globe. As the world-revolutionary threat kept looming, mainstream sectors remained fearful and searched for stronger protection than liberal democracy seemed to guarantee. In this setting, fascism emerged as an attractive regime model that could reliably protect against Communism. Therefore, fascism held enormous appeal across the globe as well. In fact, Mussolini's takeover of power in Italy stimulated several imitation efforts, which – like the Communist replication attempts examined in Chapter 3 – uniformly failed as well.

This book chapter compares civil litigation in the courts of first and second instances in Taiwan in 2010–2015 with that in U.S. federal courts in 2010–2013. The two judicial systems, as expected, are different in many ways. Settlement rates in Taiwan, even broadly defined, were below 25%; in U.S. federal court, they exceed 70%. In Taiwan, summary judgments were basically non-existent; in U.S. federal court, they represent nearly a third of merits judgments. Rates of appeal in Taiwan are nearly 10 times higher (27% versus 3%) than in the U.S. federal courts. And yet judges in Taiwan, at least those in the court of first instance, handled cases more quickly than their colleagues in the U.S. federal courts—indeed, twice as fast. Yet, the two judicial systems respond similarly when encountering simple debt collection cases. These cases, large in number in both systems, fail to settle as standard theories would predict. Instead, these disputes are frequently resolved through default judgments. This chapter provides cautionary lessons for future empirical comparative civil procedure studies.