Suchergebnisse

Why do clashes of right and wrong occur? And why are some clashes worse than others? Here, Donald Black shows how changes in intimacy (friends or strangers?), inequality (rich or poor?) and cultural diversity (Christian or Jew?) all determine when conflict happens.

AbstractUsing modeling representations as boundary objects provides an important aid to collective meaning‐making. By understanding the construct of boundary objects, which arises from sociological studies of cross‐boundary work, we can increase our effectiveness in using visual representations to facilitate shared understanding for joint action. This paper draws on theories of social construction, distributed cognition, and boundary objects to build the argument that visual representations provide the crucial pivot between the system dynamics modeling method and socially constructing shared meaning. I highlight the role of visuals particularly in the context of group model building because it provides an explicit occasion devoted to shared meaning‐making through facilitated execution of the system dynamics method. Many system dynamicists use the model‐building process and simulation analyses to socially construct shared understanding among people with differing domain expertise, and the theoretical principles and practical guidelines described here can usefully inform efforts beyond participatory modeling workshops. Copyright © 2013 System Dynamics Society

This article follows the development of a European Union gender equality regime through three broad periods: equal treatment policies, positive action measures, and Gender Mainstreaming. The policy-making process entails conflict between competing policy frames; unequal resources behind each secures the dominance of an economic frame. Strategical framing practices have been employed by equality advocates to overcome this disadvantage. This article traces the gradual shifts in meaning within each period until equality goals are integrated into the dominant economic policy frame. It concludes that equality advocates need to engage in deeper analyses of power in order to sustain attention to equality goals over longer periods of time.

This article follows the development of a European Union gender equality regime through three broad periods: equal treatment policies, positive action measures, and Gender Mainstreaming. The policy-making process entails conflict between competing policy frames; unequal resources behind each secures the dominance of an economic frame. Strategical framing practices have been employed by equality advocates to overcome this disadvantage. This article traces the gradual shifts in meaning within each period until equality goals are integrated into the dominant economic policy frame. It concludes that equality advocates need to engage in deeper analyses of power in order to sustain attention to equality goals over longer periods of time. Full text available at: https://doi.org/10.22215/rera.v5i1.201

This study examined the narratives of battered women to determine whether court advocates used principles of the feminist and strengths perspectives to assist the women in obtaining protective orders and devising safety plans. The results indicated that advocates were using principles of these perspectives. Advocates uncovered women's strengths, often reinforcing the steps the women had taken to effect positive change in their lives, and gave the women information on resources. Most of the women were satisfied with the services and believed that the advocates showed concern about their plight. Taking time to listen was cited as a major aspect of that display of concern.

The explosive growth in the number of people communicating from computers around the world via the Internet ("Net") has led to the proliferation of another type of speech, namely, scholarly articles on virtually every aspect of the Net and its many influences on life in America. One topic that has received a great deal of attention is the extent to which laws applicable within the geographical territory of the United States may be applied to the freewheeling world of Cyberspace, which knows virtually no geographical limitations. Many commentators in the United States have followed one of two streams of argument: either they have restricted their analyses to the ways in which existing U.S. law should or will affect the rights and responsibilities of Net users within the United States, or they have argued that no country's laws should apply to Cyberspace. The former group ignores the essentially international nature of the Net and overlooks the fact that regulation of the Net likely will happen at least in part at the international level. The latter group unrealistically claims that Cyberspace should be viewed by countries around the world as a new, separate jurisdiction with both the right and the ability to govern itself. These Cyber-activists overlook the fact that virtually no country in the world is likely to agree to this approach, as it would require them to cede a degree of sovereignty to a nebulous group of self-appointed self-regulators.