A unique methodology for forecasting weather based on geocentric planetary alignments originated in ancient Mesopotamia. The method, called astrometeorology, was further developed by Greek, Arab, and Renaissance scientists including Ptolemy, Al-Kindi, Tycho Brahe and Joannes Kepler. A major 17th century effort to test the method in a Baconian fashion was made by John Goad. Building on the ideas of Kepler and Goad, I test an isolated component of the method, specifically a correlation between geocentric Sun-Saturn alignments and cold temperatures, using modern daily temperature data from New England, Central England, Prague and other locations. My hypothesis states there is a correlation, shown in daily temperature records, between cooling trends in specific regions and the geocentric alignments of the Sun and the planet Saturn. The hypothesis is supported by a number of tests that show lower temperatures on days when Sun-Saturn alignments occur, especially when near the equinoxes. The astronomy of this positioning suggests that tidal forces on the atmosphere may be part of a mechanism that would explain the apparent effect. The abandonment of planetary weather forecasting by the intellectual elite in 16th and 17th century Europe is next organized as a history and discussion. In the final section, applications of the methodology to climate cycles is explored, particularly in regard to a 1536-year recurring cycle of outer planets and a cycle of similar length found in climate records. In addition, an account of biological processes that are structured around astronomical cycles is presented.

The years between the two world wars, which just preceded the emergence of the neo-Darwinian "new synthesis," were intellectually difficult ones for paleoanthropology in America. Patterns of thought deeply ingrained in biology and anthropology pushed writers on hominid evolution into interpretive "blind alleys." Most prominent among the patterns was what Ernst Mayr has called "typological thinking," which often mixed with a tendency to project "scientific" racism back into the hominid past. A "splitting" habit in taxonomy combined with these and with belief in "orthogenetic" change to make polyphyletism the norm. Hesitance to accept as human ancestors any Pleistocene forms exhibiting "primitive" characters led to phylogenies which put the known fossils on side-branches. Anatomically modern humans were thus left "ancestorless" by most writers, though nearly all continued to use existing fossils in their evolutionary scenarios by designating them as "structural ancestors." Research conducted in Europe before 1914 on the Neanderthal skeleton and on the interperetation of endocranial casts, along with the Piltdown fraud, did much to establish these phylogenies and scenarios. In tandem with these general themes came the ascendancy of several specific hypotheses that eventually clashed with accumulating evidence. That the brain had led the way in hominid evolution, that Neanderthals and other "low-brows" could be ruled out as ancestors, and that modern Homo sapiens had appeared early in the Pleistocene, became even harder to maintain. The close evolutionary bond between humans and great apes theorized in England by Sir Arthur Keith and elaborated in America by William King Gregory remained vigorous, however, despite challenge. The present study examines these issues through an analysis of the five Americans whose writings on hominid evolution were most extensive and varied--Henry Fairfield Osborn, George Grant MacCurdy, Ales Hrdlicka, Earnest A. Hooton and William K. Gregory. The writings of each are analyzed separately, so that both general themes and responses to the changing state of the discipline can be traced. This approach reveals that shared patterns of thought did not prevent considerable diversity on nearly every main issue, a fact which rendered the field fertile for rapid growth later.

Third party presidential candidates often attract a great deal of attention, but there are multitudes of non-major party candidates at lower levels seeking to influence American politics. The following analysis will examine the contextual and individual-level causes of third party/independent voting in U. S. House and Senate elections. It will assess as well the relative success or failure of non-major party candidates at the district or state level. Chapter 2 will examine the selection of non-major party candidates by individual voters, independent of context via logit models. The influence of voters' evaluations of major party candidates on whether they select a third party/independent U. S. House or Senate candidate will be of interest. The models specify as well other demographic and attitudinal indicators, including the intensity of a respondent's partisanship, to assess their impact on vote choice. Models of vote choice in presidential elections developed by Rosenstone, Behr, and Lazarus (1996) influenced the choice of variables in these models. Their theoretical argument, as well as the one used in the following analysis, employs Hirschmann's (1970) Exit, Voice and Loyalty framework. Voters are loyal to the two-party system if they select a major party candidate, they are able to voice their concerns within that system, and they exit the two-party system if they choose a non-major party candidate. This framework will help examine the behavior of voters and electorates throughout the analysis. The behavior of electorates will be the subject of Chapter 3, where the models will determine which districts or states allocate more votes to third party/independent candidates in U. S. House and Senate elections. These models will also include the recent success of third party candidates for the office in question and the percentage of the presidential vote in the current election allocated to third party/independent candidates in the district or state. This inclusion will facilitate the examination of whether some jurisdictions are more likely to vote for third party candidates because they are less aligned with the parties than are others. Some districts may be more likely to select these kinds of candidates because their overall partisan attachments are not as strong as those of other districts. The models will also include the percentage difference between the vote shares of the major party candidates in the current contest for the office. In accordance with Burden (2007), less third party/independent voting is expected to occur in closer elections. The causes of the availability of third party/independent candidates will also be examined via Heckman (1979) selection models which will include measures of the signature requirements for ballot access and previous vote percentages of third party candidates for the office in question and the presidency. The inclusion of these percentages assesses whether district demographics show possible candidates that third party candidates can get large percentages of the vote in the state/district. These models will include the demographics of the districts to measure whether large concentrations of groups associated with the New Deal alignment, such as senior citizens and union members, deter non-major party candidates from running. The multi-level analysis in Chapter 4 will examine individual-level and macro-level factors that make voters more likely to select third party candidates. Logit-link models will examine these attributes and their impact on voting behavior; logit-link models can take into account variables measured at the district/state level (i.e., the percentage difference between major party vote shares) and the individual level (i.e., respondents' evaluations of major party candidates), and evaluate their influence on individual vote choice. The models will include individual-level variables from Chapter 2, as well as some macro-level indicators. The individual variables in the logit-link models will include: the last third party vote percentage for the office being contested, the current or most recent third party/independent presidential vote percentage, and the percentage difference between the major party candidates in the current election. These variables are expected to send the signal to voters that exiting (Hirschmann 1970) the two-party system is a viable choice in their area. Context is expected to condition whether a voter chooses a candidate who is not aligned with the major parties, independent of individual preferences. In the analysis, a respondent's evaluations of major party candidates are a significant predictor of his/her vote choice in all of the models that use this measure of a respondent's preferences. Also, higher current or most recent third party/independent presidential vote percentages make respondents more likely to select non-major party candidates in all of the logit-link models that use this variable to predict vote choice. Candidate preferences are very strong determinants of individual vote choice, and larger percentages of third party presidential votes in a district/state make respondents much more likely to select third party legislative candidates. / A Dissertation submitted to the Department of Political Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. / Fall Semester, 2011. / August 29, 2011. / Congressional Elections, Political Parties, Third Parties, Voting / Includes bibliographical references. / Robert A. Jackson, Professor Directing Dissertation; Lance deHaven Smith, University Representative; Charles Barrilleaux, Committee Member; Jennifer Jerit, Committee Member.

Transnational terrorism (TNT) is a process that, by definition, involves both international and domestic actors. A non-trivial portion of the literature that seeks to answer the question of why TNT occurs has focused on country-level characteristics (democracy, wealth/poverty, etc.). I argue that these country characteristics create opportunities for TNT, but not necessarily the motivation for actors to commit acts of TNT. A more complete explanation of TNT needs to include both opportunity and motivation factors at both the domestic and international level. In addition to the need for consideration of both opportunities and motivations, I also argue that we need to look at both domestic and international processes to explain TNT, and that to do so we should explore the transnational consequences of a state's foreign policy. I argue that if a foreign policy creates a perception of threat towards the economic and physical freedom of the citizens in a country targeted by another country's foreign policy, the number of TNT attacks against the initiator of the policy will increase. If the policy's impact on their freedoms is positive, the number of TNT attacks will decrease. Using ITERATE data, I test this theory in different foreign policy scenarios. The results suggest that countries need to consider the possibility that some foreign policies create negative externalities (such as TNT) and prepare for these contingencies. / A Dissertation submitted to the Department of Political Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. / Spring Semester, 2012. / March 23, 2012. / Foreign Policy, Military intervention, Sanctions, Terrorism / Includes bibliographical references. / Will H. Moore, Professor Directing Dissertation; Michael Creswell, University Representative; Mark Souva, Committee Member; David Siegel, Committee Member.

What kinds of states make the best allies? This dissertation studies the determinants of defensive alliance reliability during war. I argue that strong democratic states constitute reliable allies. For these states, the miltiary costs of honoring an alliance agreement are sufficiently low, while potential electoral penalities are potentially large. For these reasons, strong democracies defend their allies during war more frequently. Support for this theory is found from a number of sources. First, I present the first individual-level experimental data supporting audience costs in the realm of military alliances. Second, I present observational data showing that strong democratic countries consistently defend their alliance partners during war. / A Dissertation submitted to the Department of Political Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. / Fall Semester, 2012. / September 28, 2012. / Alliances, Audience Costs, Economy, Experimental, Public Opinion / Includes bibliographical references. / Mark Souva, Professor Directing Thesis; Michael Creswell, University Representative; Jennifer Jerit, Committee Member; David Siegel, Committee Member; William H. Moore, Committee Member.

The United States' increasingly fragmented and decentralized policymaking system produces inefficiencies and gridlock, with an increasing reliance on states and especially on localities. Encouraging localized, self-organized policymaking is one way that local governments respond to delegation and the renewed dependence on local institutions. This collaborative style of governance depends on a policy's stakeholders to not only participate in policy formulation, but in many cases, implement and evaluate the policies as well. This dissertation analyzes both the possibilities within and the limitations of collaborative governance as observed in watershed management; a policy area dominated by self-organizing stakeholders, while still suffering from many of the problems associated with collective behavior. Until recently, studies of collective behavior focus on existing institutions or individual characteristics, such as trust, to overcome collective action problems. Comparatively, the work on how these two elements interact to influence behavior remains underdeveloped. With network data from regional surveys and laboratory experiments I show that the formation of social capital--that element so critical for mitigating the inefficiencies of a fragmented political system, differs according to the resource exchanged, existing institutional structures and the actors participating in the policy arena. Upon completion, this dissertation will advise project managers and others like them on the most successful organizational structures, conditional on the task at hand and the characteristics of actors in their organizations so that they might extract maximum gains from exchange. / A Dissertation submitted to the Department of Political Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. / Fall Semester, 2012. / October 18, 2012. / collaboration, cooperation, coordination, network, social capital / Includes bibliographical references. / John T. Scholz, Professor Directing Dissertation; David J. Cooper, University Representative; Jason Barabas, Committee Member; Richard C. Feiock, Committee Member.

Background: How can state Medicaid programs accomplish necessary cost-control reforms while preserving or improving the intent of the program? How can private insurers maximize satisfaction among enrollees while also managing a bottom line? In 2005, Florida began a Medicaid Reform pilot program intended to contain spending while providing enrollees new opportunity for choice-making and involvement in health care decisions. Analysis of this program provides a unique, quasi-experimental opportunity to address whether choice-making matters for how enrollees feel about their health plan, their health care, and/or about government more broadly. Methods: Using original survey data of 6,904 enrollees in Florida's Medicaid Reform pilot program, this dissertation addresses various ways in which "choice-making" relates to enrollee attitudes toward health plans, health care, and government institutions. Multiple regression and multiple imputation models were applied. The data and approach in this study provide a novel opportunity for evaluation in three respects: (1) the data permit analysis within a comparable population where some individuals exercised and/or knew of various aspects of "choice" and others did not; (2) due to the basic criteria required of all Medicaid health plans, enrollees by and large receive the same product regardless of which plan they are in, permitting a compelling evaluation of the independent impact of choice; and (3) the data permit analysis of links between the perceived responsiveness of a public program and enrollee feelings of efficacy. Results:This dissertation tests the presumption used by the founders of Medicaid Reform that giving enrollees increased choice-making opportunity would result in greater levels of satisfaction with health care services; and finds that both choice-making, and the quality of the choice-making environment, are significant predictors of enrollees attitudes toward their health plans, their health care, and toward government in general. The following aspects of choice are consistently significant and positive in relation to enrollee satisfaction with health plans, health care, and government: having chosen one's health plan; having heard about Choice Counseling; having had a positive experience with Choice Counseling; having enough doctors to choose from; knowing how to change plans if one so desires; and having more than one option for care. However, enrollees who have a negative experience with the choice-making process are significantly less likely to report satisfaction, implying that it is not enough to simply offer choice but that these programs must be implemented in an effective, user-friendly way. These findings reinforce and expand upon academic theories on "choice", fill in gaps in the policy feedback framework, and provide novel and applicable information to policymakers in and beyond the realm of health care. / A Dissertation submitted to the Department of Political Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. / Fall Semester, 2012. / October 5, 2012. / health care administration, health insurance, health policy, Medicaid, public opinion, survey research / Includes bibliographical references. / Charles Barrilleaux, Professor Co-Directing Dissertation; Jason Barabas, Professor Co-Directing Dissertation; Carol Weissert, Committee Member; William Weissert, Committee Member; Lance deHaven Smith, University Representative.

The primary objective of this study is to compare two methods of mapping and analyzing policy networks using semantic network analysis of textual information from media sources. The two methods compared were human coding and what the paper calls the automated computational method. This was accomplished by (1) using archival data as a source for policy network information, (2) determining whether the use of automated computational network mapping and analysis of archival media data compromised the accuracy and reliability of policy network results, and finally (3) by establishing whether the automated methods are a reliable tool to map and analyze policy networks. To compare the automated computational method with the human coding method, semantic results in a network matrix dataset are generated using AutoMap, a semantic network analysis program, and compared to the human coders' dataset from the same media sources. The comparative study revealed that the automated computational method identifies key terms at greater rates, requires significant preparation of data from media sources for reliable analyses, and presents errors affecting the network results. However, the characteristics of each network generated from the matrix data were similar but not identical. Correcting for the weaknesses of the automated computational method, researchers in the policy sciences and policy analysts may find a reliable and efficient method of mapping and analyzing policy networks of textual information from media sources. / A Thesis submitted to the Department of Political Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science. / Fall Semester, 2012. / October 15, 2012. / Automated computational method, Network mapping, Policy networks, Semantic Network Analysis / Includes bibliographical references. / John T. Scholz, Professor Directing Thesis; Richard C. Feiock, Committee Member; John Barry Ryan, Committee Member.

There are generally considered to be three main types of economic voting: pocketbook, sociotropic, and group based. In their article "Dimensions of Sociotropic Behavior: Group-Based Judgments of Fairness and Well Being," Diana Mutz and Jeffery Mondak propose a fourth type that is derived from group based voting: fairness voting. This new model of voting suggests that voters consider the relative economic wellbeing of socioeconomic classes, in addition to the traditional considerations of personal, national, and group wellbeing, when deciding on a candidate or party to support. Using data from the 1984 South Bend Study, they estimate a series of logistic regression models and conclude that there is, indeed, strong evidence that fairness plays a role in voters' electoral decisions. In this paper I offer a new perspective on Mutz and Mondak's work and reexamine their findings. I put forward the hypothesis that voters' ideology impacts how much economic fairness weighs on their electoral decisions. Using a similar methodology, I am able to show that, indeed, ideology does affect the extent to which fairness plays into the voters' decision-making process--with those who identify themselves as liberal being far more likely to base their decision on perceived fairness than those who identify as conservative. / A Thesis submitted to the Department of Political Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science. / Summer Semester, 2012. / June 27, 2012. / conservative, economic voting, fairness voting, inequality, liberal, sociotropic / Includes bibliographical references. / Cherie Maestas, Professor Directing Thesis; Robert Jackson, Committee Member; Charles Barrilleaux, Committee Member.

This dissertation examines the interactive effect of power and third-party peace operations on the bargaining offers made by warring groups during civil war. Chapter 1 sets up the motivation for the research and provides a broad overview of the dissertation. Chapter 2 discusses previous lines of research that shed light on the relationship between power and bargaining and draws two hypotheses about the relationship between power and bargaining offers. Based on previous research on civil war and third party operations, chapter 3 explores how the expectation of successful implementation affects warring groups' bargaining offers. The hypothesis is drawn from a game theoretic model. Chapter 4 provides the research design for a statistical analysis and a case study. This chapter includes detailed information about definitions of concepts and measurement. Chapter 5 presents the results of the statistical analysis using ordinary least squares. Chapter 6 conducts a case study of civil war termination bargaining between warring groups in the Sierra Leone civil wars. Chapter 7 discusses the contribution of this dissertation for both the academic and policy realms, as well as the future plan for this line of research. / A Dissertation submitted to the Department of Political Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. / Summer Semester, 2012. / June 28, 2012. / BARGAINING OFFER, CIVIL WAR, POLITICAL POWER SHARING, SIERRA LEONE / Includes bibliographical references. / Will H. Moore, Professor Directing Dissertation; Richard Feiock, University Representative; David A. Siegel, Committee Member; Mark Souva, Committee Member.