I purchased this book for an undergraduate psych course, "Psychology & the Law". As I have a BA in psychology, I've read quite a few psychology textbooks in the past few years, and this might possibly be the worst of the bunch.

Generally, the book is somewhat disorganized and the chapters don't really seem to flow together. The text gives the feeling that the reader is jumping from topic to topic without any sense of cohesion between the chapters. The authors try to bind the sections together with the running theme of dilemmas in the legal system, but this strategy just strikes me as contrived, especially since some of the so-called dilemmas are rather commonsensical. Also, the authors' writing style is lacking, and I find myself with many questions after reading the chapter - certain topics just aren't explained very well, or very efficiently, for that matter.

Overall, I think the textbook is adequate for teaching the material but I'm convinced that it can't be the best choice out there. As a fellow reviewer mentioned, the text mentions nothing in regards to rehab of criminals, which seems like a huge oversight (after all, isn't rehabilitation half the battle?). So please, PLEASE, if you're a professor who's considering using this text to teach your class - DON'T!

I bought this book for a course entitled Psychology and the Law, which I am taking as an elective course, and not as part of my areas of concentration. Although I am a Sociology and Women's Studies major, you don't need to be a feminist (or even a sociologist for that matter), to see where this book is lacking vital information on the criminal justice system, and on rehabilitation techniques used in North America.

As a Canadian student, I did find this book useful, although it is primarily focused on the American model of criminal justice. The basic theories and ideologies are pretty much the same for both Canada and the United States, so in that respect, the information is still valuable. Some Chapters of interest to sociologists, law students and forensic psychologists alike are entitled "Lawyers: Socialization, Training and Ethics" , "Theories of Crime" , "Forensic Assesment I & II" , "Jury Trials I & II" , "Psychology of Victims" , "The Rights of Special Groups" and "Punnishment and Sentencing". What seems to be lacking in these chapters, upon quick glance, is that there are no questions at the end, just a quick summary and a list of key terms. Personally, I find I perform better on an exam when there are questions left unanswered at the end of a chapter (gets the ol' wheels in my noggin' turning away ...), but for whatever reason, there isn't any. Also, the glossary doesn't contain all the the 'key terms' at the end of a chapter so sometimes you have to use another psychological or legal dictionary to find the definitions.

Another critical area that is lacking in this book, is any research from a feminist perspective. There is a paragraph here and there regarding 'feminist jurisprudence' and a brief mention of Carol Gilligan's conception of women's moral development, which, by the way, has paved the way for many rehabilitative programs not only in North America but world-wide. There is no mention of this ANYWHERE in the book, even though empirical evedince has proven that rehabilitative techniques of this nature are for more successful in preventing criminals from repeat offences. Also, many of the theories of crime are outdated (a good number of them are biological theories) and there are NO theories of female criminality what-so-ever. The critiques feminists have made of these male-dominated theoreis are not listed. Apparently women just don't break the law!

All in all, it's a good read if you're a student in the field, but remember to think objectively and keep an open mind. It does take a kind of male-oriented pro-punnishment type angle but it you can look past these details and remind yourself that this is only one point of view, it does provide alot of information. To top it all off, the examples used to demonstrate the points in the book are all fairly recent, like the O.J. Simpson trials, debates on censorship on the internet as well as debates on doctor-assisted suicide. It's a book I plan to keep on my shelf throughout my studies, but not one I can really say was "remarkable" or "accurate". I'll likely reach for this book when I need a more traditional opinion for a gender studies assignment with regard to the law ... it only emphasizes one side of the story.

This is your typical beginner book on investments. The book is separated into 6 categories, each category having 2 chapters apiece. These categories are, The Investment Environment, Important Conceptual Tools, Investing in Common Stock, Portfolio Management, and Derivative Securities. Although, one can see that the book seems to broken down nicely in each category, the examples illustrated in this book are very sketchy, and at times hard to follow.

What makes this book so difficult to follow is that at the end of each chapter, you are given a set of review questions to practice what you learned. This is very bad if your professor assigns the book, but doesn't use it. Now, this is the catch. There are NO answers for these review questions anywhere in this book. In fact, the only way one can possibly get these study question answers is if her or she is the professor. In order to do this, you have to login to the author's page as the "educator." Of course, students who buy this book for class, will only have student access which only enables them to see what they "need" to have learned from each chapter, and access to a small pc program that solves everything for you. A nice tool, but kind of pointless if you do not know what you are doing in the first place. Oh yea, did I mention you only have a 6 month subscription to this "service." I do not want to call it a service by any means, since its useless.

In short, if you are a student, or want to get the general ideas of investment, Do NOT buy this book, since you will never know if you are applying the principles that you learned from this book properly. I had no choice but to buy this book, but if you can avoid this book, please do, and save yourself a headache or two.

Iranian forces - using armed speedboats called "Boghammers" and their Shah-era American jets - make life miserable for Persian Gulf shipping. To counter the threat, a British diplomat comes up with a plausibly deniable plan teaming British pilots in old but still formidable Hawker Hunters and F-14's from a nearby USN carrier.

With all of the elaborate plots of Dale Brown and similar books, "Sidwinder" seems pretty thin - uppity Iranians, an Iranian fighter ace who seems to flip between being a world-class jerk and simple psychosis, stiff British types, and anonymously stalwart Americans. The book keeps the yankee ace and his Persian rival at a distance, not even trying to bring them together sooner without it becoming the battle royale. To fill the time, we have the hero undergo the normal trials of being a carrier-fighter driver, though with less of the depth than you'll find in most other books. Just about everything in this book seems like it was borrowed from other books, or at least generic. Even the name "Sidewinder" - one of the world's most widely used counter-air missiles - doesn't have anything much to do with the plot. ("Dueling Tomcats" - a reference to the airplane flown by both sides, would have been a better title, but would also have required a better book to stamp it on.) Even the F-14 which is at the heart of the story seems even more underwritten than the jets in most other books. Technothriller writers are routinely praised for prose that makes the reader feels as if he's actually riding one of the jets, though few actually earn that praise, and nothing here breaks that depressing pattern. Nothing here reminds of how big, powerful or complicated the big plane is. Both the Iranian F-14 and the Navy Tomcat seem to be in the same condition, even though a US embargo of spare parts had nearly resulted in grounding of all US built jets by the mid 1980's. You'd think that the Iranian plane would have its share of problems. The author could have written a book simply about the Iranian pilot's trvails in the Gulf War without indulging in grandiose air war stories (which readers could have satisfed themselves for simply by buying "Falcon 3.0" which came out at the same time. There's simply not enough detail to satisfy fans of Tom Clancy (or even Patrick Robinson). The Iranian ace is so over-the-top, you almost think this book a parody, but there's not much to him - besides the fact that he's a monster jerk - to make him funny (and a gratuitous rape, though thankfully underwritten, just to remind you that this isn't fun). Instead, read any of the Grafton books, or pick up a copy of "Punk's War" by Ward Carroll.

This was Lawrence's first published novel in the UK, and represents the writer's early experiment in the quest for an established style.

Far too much descriptive detail, and too little narrative, to be considered an enjoyable read. It is however interesting to note the early appearance of themes that were to dominate later Lawrence works. In particular, the nature-civilisation dichotomy, which became a Lawrence trademark, is apparent here in the relationship between the cultured, educated narrator and his best friend, the raw-boned but affable farmer, George.

Readers wishing to introduce themselves to Lawrence would be better advised to start with the book published two years later, and that marked the beginning of his literary reputation: "Sons and Lovers"

I thought the author would actually REVIEW the outlet malls, not just tell us where they are (you can get that for free on the Internet!) He warns that not all "outlets" really offer great bargains -- but you have to check 'em all out yourself to find out which ones do.

And guess what -- he says you can get great prices at Sams, KB Toys, and Tuesday Morning. Well, "duh".