This is a lively and engaging look at the factors, known as `artifacts', that can confound behavioural experiments. By describing key research studies in a narrative style, Rosnow and Rosenthal address the issues of scientific method and clarify the difficulties that behavioural researchers will encounter. Their final chapter addresses ethical issues, again through narrative use of examples.

This Article examines the requirements of testamentary capacity in the execution of wills, and the difficulties that courts face in determining a testator's intent. The author begins by describing the doctrine of testamentary capacity and explores its connection to the ideas of individualism. The author then examines the tests that courts have adopted for assessing testamentary capacity and argues that these tests have the potential to conflict with the idea that values are subjective. The author proceeds to illustrate how courts typically empathize with the testator, rather than focus on the testator's abstract ability to reason, and explores the relationship between the use of empathy and the premise of wills law. The author concludes that other doctrines of wills law depend more heavily on empathy than previously assumed and that the critical inquiry of a testator's intent can never be confidently resolved.

The previously reported reaction of tolazamide with nitrite, under physiological conditions, to form N‐nitrosohexamethyleneimine and surprisingly, N‐nitrosopiperidine was confirmed. By using the six‐membered ring analogue of tolazamide, 1‐(piperidyl)‐3‐(p‐tolylsulfonyl)urea, which yields the corresponding N‐nitrosopiperidine and N‐nitrosopyrrolidine, the present study shows that an unusual ring contraction occurs, excising the carbon alpha to the nitrogen.