This paper critically analyzes the survey literature on trust in government and confidence in institutions. It highlights the gap between theoretical understandings of trust which encompass trust, lack of trust, and distrust, next to empirical realizations which fail to consider active distrust of government. Using a specially tailored survey designed for this project, the paper is the first which directly compares competing operationalizations of trust and distrust. The most frequently used measures, both from the National Election Studies and the General Social Survey, tend to exaggerate the level of disaffection compared to a new measure especially designed to run from active trust, which anticipates that the government will do the right thing, to active distrust, the expectation that it will do the wrong thing. Multivariate analyses reveal statistically significant differences in the underlying determinants of these measures. The conventional NES measure in particular is more influenced by short-term evaluations of political events and leaders; our new measure of active trust/distrust taps a more deeply seated orientation toward government.

Bacteriophage T7 DNA polymerase (gene 5 protein, gp5) interacts with its processivity factor, Escherichia coli thioredoxin, via a unique loop at the tip of the thumb subdomain. We find that this thioredoxin-binding domain is also the site of interaction of the phage-encoded helicase͞primase (gp4) and ssDNA binding protein (gp2.5). Thioredoxin itself interacts only weakly with gp4 and gp2.5 but drastically enhances their binding to gp5. The acidic C termini of gp4 and gp2.5 are critical for this interaction in the absence of DNA. However, the C-terminal tail of gp4 is not required for binding to gp5 when the latter is bound to a primer͞template. We propose that the thioredoxin-binding domain is a molecular switch that regulates the interaction of T7 DNA polymerase with other proteins of the replisome.DNA replication ͉ molecular switch ͉ replisome ͉ gene 4 protein ͉ thioredoxin

No abstract

No abstract

Not so long ago, political scientists were enthusiastically proclaiming that political socialization was a growth stock. But interest in the subfield has slackened, and the bull market has turned bearish. This article argues that a central cause of this recent scholarly neglect is a lack of theoretical confidence. Political socialization has been branded as less worthy of study largely because it is difficult to study and to understand in the absence of an explicit psychological model of learning. A strong theoretical rationale must be developed to return the subfield to its deserved place of priority. Such an endeavor is also Justified by the new popularity of the Piagetian model, which is inappropriate for understanding political learning because it emphasizes the foremost growth of logical operations and the individual as the prime motivating force. Another model, that of L. S. Vygotsky, is more useful, incorporating many of Piaget's insights without his unrealistic expectations. I outline Vygotsky's cognitive-developmental model, indicate its applicability to the small body of defensible research on the process of political learning, and conclude with a research agenda suggested by the model.