Search results

While scientific studies may help conflicting stakeholders come to agreement on a best management option or policy, often they do not. We review the factors affecting trust in the efficacy and objectivity of scientific studies in an analytical‐deliberative process where conflict is present, and show how they may be incorporated in an extension to the traditional Bayesian decision model. The extended framework considers stakeholders who differ in their prior beliefs regarding the probability of possible outcomes (in particular, whether a proposed technology is hazardous), differ in their valuations of these outcomes, and differ in their assessment of the ability of a proposed study to resolve the uncertainty in the outcomes and their hazards—as measured by their perceived false positive and false negative rates for the study. The Bayesian model predicts stakeholder‐specific preposterior probabilities of consensus, as well as pathways for increasing these probabilities, providing important insights into the value of scientific information in an analytic‐deliberative decision process where agreement is sought. It also helps to identify the interactions among perceived risk and benefit allocations, scientific beliefs, and trust in proposed scientific studies when determining whether a consensus can be achieved. The article provides examples to illustrate the method, including an adaptation of a recent decision analysis for managing the health risks of electromagnetic fields from high voltage transmission lines.

AbstractStandard versions of the sociology of rational practice assume justificationist theories of rationality: all rational beliefs are justified and rational individuals do not believe any non-justified statements. This theory appears to some to offer the possiblity of finding "deeper" insights into social behavior: some actions presented by actors as "rational" can, in fact, be explained as non-justified and, therefore, as mere consequences of prestige and/or power conflicts. When, however, it turns out that no theories can be justified, then all theories are irrational. This leads to relativism. The possibility, that we may profitably construct alternative theories of rationality is, in contrast, raised nearly uniquely by fallibilist theories of rationality. In order to take advantage of this, an alternative to the dominant methodological individualist theory of rational action is needed and possible. According to this alternative, rational action consists of problem-solving within institutional contexts without justification. Such a non-relativist sociology of rational practice can be enlightening and useful. Differing institutional contexts offer differing standards of rationality.

This study aimed to analyze and synthesize the main concepts about Krav Maga in the last four decades. This is a review of the academic literature with a qualitative approach and a narrative nature. The searched databases are PubMed/Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, SciELO, Index Medicus, Capes Platform, ProQuest Digital Dissertations, Brazilian Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations (BDTD) and Google Scholar, between the years 1982 and 2022. Empirical studies with cross-sectional, longitudinal, case, control and randomized design were included, and books and private websites were excluded. The textual corpus was processed by the IRaMuTeQ software. Forty-four studies met the eligibility criteria, of which eighteen conceptualized Krav Maga as "self-defense", twelve as "fighting", seven as "hand-to-hand combat", four as "self-defense art", three as "cultural heritage" and immaterial" and another as a "hybrid system". The main aspects evoked and addressed in the research were: Operational and Military, Historical, Pedagogical, Psychosocial and Physiological. Most studies had low to moderate methodological quality, indicating the need for greater control of biases in future research. In addition, it was evidenced that Krav Maga is a system, or method developed for self-defense, however, it is a polysemic term, and cannot be understood in a uniform and linear way.

The materials of the international collective monograph show the latest Ukrainian-Canadian socio-political, historical, philological, cultural, educational and pedagogical research in the field of modern Canadian Studies. The monograph includes the investigations by several scientists from Ukraine and Canada (from Edmonton, Lutsk, Kyiv, Lviv, and Sumy). Such publication comes out in Ukraine for the first time. For scholars, postgraduates and doctoral students, undergraduates and lecturers of the faculties of international relations, foreign philology, history, political science, philology and journalism, education and social work, Canadian centres in Ukraine and centres of Ukrainian Studies in Canada, as well as for anyone interested in research of Ukrainian-Canadian relations.

The article is devoted to the formation of a new branch of research studies – transitology. It purposes is an interdisciplinary analysis of the transitive studies formation and identification of prospects for their further development. The author notes that transitology having emerged in political science from the need to develop the theoretical and methodological foundations for the research of the processes of transition to democracy. The transition to democracy was represented in the transitive paradigm as a process of consistent institutionalization of political change, which in its development takes place in three stages: liberalization (the institutionalization of civil liberties without the transformation of the ruling apparatus), democratization (the institutionalization of the democratic power, which based on the free competition of political forces) and socialization (the institutionalization of democratic political behavior). Then it spread to economic science, where the object of research was the processes of transition to a market economy. However, the analogous direction is still absent in cultural science, which hampers the formation of an integrated approach to the analysis of social changes taking place in the modern world. The author believes that it should be related to relevant directions in political and economic sciences and must complete the process of developing an integrated approach to the study of social transformations taking place in the modern world. The initial and desirable final positions of cultural transformation must be correlated with similar positions of political and economic transitions. Such positions should recognize the closed and open types of culture. Such positions should recognize the «closed» and «open» types of culture, since it is the «discovery of culture» is the problem that determines the course and outcome of the democratization process in both postcommunist countries and developing countries of the Third World.Key words: transitology, transitional societies, political democracy, market economy, closed and open cultures. ; Статтю присвячено становленню нової галузі наукових студій – транзитології. Автор відмічає, що, виникнув у політичній науці з потреби розробки теоретико-методологічних засад дослідження процесів переходу до демократії, транзитологія потім поширилася й на економічну науку, де об'єктом студіювання стали процеси переходу до ринкової економіки. Проте аналогічного напряму ще немає в культурології, що гальмує становлення комплексного підходу до аналізу соціальних змін, які відбуваються в сучасному світі.Ключові слова: транзитологія, перехідні суспільства, політична демократія, ринкова економіка, закрита та відкрита культури. Статья посвящена становлению новой отрасли научных исследований – транзитологии. Автор отмечает, что, возникнув в политической науке из потребности разработки теоретико-методологических основ исследования процессов перехода к демократии, транзитология потом распространилась и на экономическую науку, где объектом исследований стали процессы перехода к рыночной экономике. Однако аналогическое направление пока отсутствует в культурологии, что тормозит становление комплексного подхода к анализу социальных изменений, происходящих в современном мире.Ключевые слова: транзитология, переходные общества, политическая демократия, рыночная экономика, закрытая и открытая культуры. The article is devoted to the formation of a new branch of research studies – transitology. It purposes is an interdisciplinary analysis of the transitive studies formation and identification of prospects for their further development. The author notes that transitology having emerged in political science from the need to develop the theoretical and methodological foundations for the research of the processes of transition to democracy. The transition to democracy was represented in the transitive paradigm as a process of consistent institutionalization of political change, which in its development takes place in three stages: liberalization (the institutionalization of civil liberties without the transformation of the ruling apparatus), democratization (the institutionalization of the democratic power, which based on the free competition of political forces) and socialization (the institutionalization of democratic political behavior). Then it spread to economic science, where the object of research was the processes of transition to a market economy. However, the analogous direction is still absent in cultural science, which hampers the formation of an integrated approach to the analysis of social changes taking place in the modern world. The author believes that it should be related to relevant directions in political and economic sciences and must complete the process of developing an integrated approach to the study of social transformations taking place in the modern world. The initial and desirable final positions of cultural transformation must be correlated with similar positions of political and economic transitions. Such positions should recognize the closed and open types of culture. Such positions should recognize the «closed» and «open» types of culture, since it is the «discovery of culture» is the problem that determines the course and outcome of the democratization process in both postcommunist countries and developing countries of the Third World.Key words: transitology, transitional societies, political democracy, market economy, closed and open cultures.