Suchergebnisse

AbstractObjectiveInvestigating concordance between parents' mentalization and their moderating effects on the link between children's exposure to marital conflict and internalizing and externalizing behaviors.BackgroundMarital conflict is a risk factor for children's behavior. Mentalization is a parental strength that can protect children's well‐being in the face of adversity. Little is known about parental mentalization within the family context.MethodCohabiting, heterosexual Israeli couples (N = 89) with a 3‐ to 5‐year‐old child were interviewed individually to assess their mentalization skills (mind‐mindedness). Reports of the child's exposure to marital conflict using the O'Leary‐Porter Scale of Marital Conflict and externalizing and internalizing behaviors using the Child Behavior Checklist were obtained.ResultsThere was limited accord between parents' mentalization within each couple. The positive associations between conflict exposure and children's internalizing and externalizing behaviors were mitigated when the parents' mentalization skills were matched or when the mother's mentalization skills were high. A significant three‐way interaction emerged such that the contribution of the father's mentalization skills to the prediction of children's externalizing and internalizing behavior depended on the mentalization skills of the mother and the level of exposure to conflict.ConclusionCoordinated, high levels of parental mentalization can mitigate the negative impact of exposing children to parental conflict.ImplicationsParental mentalization can mitigate children's exposure to marital conflict. Enhancing parental mentalization is an important treatment goal for the family and for the child. Family interventions can benefit from evaluating each parent's initial parental mentalization skills to determine whether the parental couple share a similar level of this capacity. Detecting and addressing gaps between the parents in their parental mentalization skills can facilitate coordinated and shared parenting.

Departing from accounts of minority group politics that focus on the role of group identity in advancing group members' common interests, we investigate political decisions involving tradeoffs between group interests and simple self-interest. Using the case of black Americans, we investigate crystallized group norms about politics, internalized beliefs about group solidarity, and mechanisms for enforcing both through social pressure. Through a series of novel behavioral experiments that offer black subjects individual incentives to defect from the position most favored by black Americans as a group, we test the effects of social pressure to conform. We find that racialized social pressure and internalized beliefs in group solidarity are constraining and depress self-interested behavior. Our results speak to a common conflict—choosing between maximizing group interests and self-interest—and yet also offer specific insight into how blacks remain so homogeneous in partisan politics despite their growing ideological and economic variation.

PurposeThe purpose of this study is to examine individual differences in the susceptibility to pluralistic ignorance of avoidance among Japanese by measuring the value of social harmony.Design/methodology/approachTwo studies were conducted to examine the effects of a concern for social harmony on pluralistic ignorance of conflict avoidance among Japanese, hypothesizing that the pluralistic ignorance of avoidance will occur more frequently among those with a low regard for the value of social harmony than those with a high regard.FindingsConsistent with the hypothesis, pluralistic ignorance occurred only among Japanese participants with a low regard for the value of social harmony and not among those who valued it highly.Originality/valueThese findings suggest that those who have a different stance from the cultural value feel a normative pressure by the biased perception of others' behavior due to pluralistic ignorance, which, as a result, works to preserve the predominant cultural value.

PurposeScholarly research provides few insights into how integrating the western values of individualism and low power distance with the eastern values of collectivism and high power distance may influence cross-cultural conflict management. Following the framework of the theory of cooperation and competition, the purpose of this paper is to directly examine the impacts of organization-level collectivism and individualism, as well as high and low power distance, to determine the interactive effects of these four factors on cross-cultural conflict management.Design/methodology/approachThis is a 2×2 experiment study. Data were collected from a US laboratory experiment with 80 participants.FindingsAmerican managers working in a company embracing western low power distance and eastern collectivism values were able to manage conflict cooperatively with their Chinese workers. Moreover, American managers working in a company valuing collectivism developed more trust with Chinese workers, and those in a company culture with high power distance were more interested in their workers' viewpoints and more able to reach integrated solutions.Originality/valueThis study is an interdisciplinary research applying the social psychology field's theory of cooperation and competition to the research on employee-manager, cross-cultural conflict management (which are industrial relations and organizational behavior topics, respectively), with an eye to the role of cultural adaptation. Furthermore, this study included an experiment to directly investigate the interactions between American managers and Chinese workers discussing work distribution conflict in four different organizational cultures.

Human need for land has influenced land use behavior and is an acute problem in many regions. Many areas have changed their original function in order to sustain human life, one of which causes forests to be converted into settlements, plantation and agricultural areas as well as mining areas. However, often the converted land is customary land in the form of forests and not a few that have long been disputed. In the era of independence, the government recognized that customary land belonged to the state. In its implementation, customary land is recognized by the government but its ownership rights are not. The indigenous people are only allowed to manage it. This study aims to categorize solutions that can be used in resolving land-use conflicts over customary lands. This study used the traditional review method with secondary data obtained from appropriate and relevant sources. Customary land is recognized in Indonesian law through UUPA No. 5 of 1960. The highest right to land owned or controlled by community members and its implementation is regulated by customary / village elders called ulayat rights, but provided that its existence and implementation still exist. In cases that occur in various countries, there are various kinds of implementation irregularities caused by excessive usage patterns or not according to the main purpose of their use. In Indonesia, irregularities in the implementation of the Law on indigenous peoples to manage their land are often found. Even some government policies are still detrimental to society. Therefore, in resolving customary land conflicts, one must look at various angles and see the history of disputed land, and can refer to several cases that have occurred in other countries. The categorization of land-use conflict solutions can be viewed from the point of view of the resolution process, the distribution of use of customary land use for indigenous peoples in conflict, what changes in land use have occurred according to procedures or not, mapping is needed to avoid ...

One consequence of armed conflict, especially that of a non-international character, is serious damage done to vital societal infrastructure. Education–schools and universities–can be severely disrupted, even subject to attack. Targeting of schools may not invariably be unlawful if educational facilities are being put to military use. Such use may itself not be unlawful but it can result in schools being transformed from civilian objects into military objectives–and subject, therefore, to lawful targeting. This was a problem highlighted by humanitarian NGOs a decade ago and led to the formation, by both NGOs and United Nations agencies, of the Global Coalition to Protect Education from Attack (GCPEA). In considering ways of reducing the vulnerability of schools, universities and the students and staff present within them, GCPEA decided to develop a set of "soft law" guidelines on the military use of education, the aim being to assist with Law of Armed Conflict compliance but also to encourage armed forces and armed non-state actors to act well within the limits of the law. The resulting Guidelines were drafted in 2012-13, published in 2013, began being championed by Norway and Argentina in 2014, and were launched at State level within a Safe Schools Declaration in 2015. They have now been endorsed by 106 States and there is evidence now emerging of their positive influence on behavior in conflict zones. The Guidelines are a good example of a successful "soft law" initiative and this paper provides an account of their development and advocacy.

Polarization has been a prevalent phenomenon in US politics, yet its foreign policy implications remain understudied. A common assumption is that polarization undermines the utilization of United States' material power via a coherent grand strategy. In this article, I argue that polarization does not make the United States incapable of enacting a foreign policy per se but instead affects US foreign policy conduct, power, and strategy toward international negotiations. The effects of domestic polarization for US foreign policy behavior in international negotiations are best understood via an advanced application of the "two-level game" model, which conceptualizes a state's domestic politics as a determinant factor for the executive branch's approach toward foreign affairs. I identify three effects polarization has on US foreign policy: (1) a sorting effect, which produces homogenous partisan coalitions with divergent foreign policy preferences and inclines the executive to pursue an obstinate international negotiation conduct; (2) a partisan conflict effect, which weakens Congress as a veto player and reduces United States' bargaining power; and, finally, (3) an institutional corrosion effect, which inclines the executive branch to manipulate domestic support and to politicize international negotiations at home. In sum, domestic polarization increases the opportunity costs for US foreign policy toward international negotiations and contributes to global instability. Anecdotal evidence from US foreign policy over the last decade offers support for these effects, but further empirical research is needed to better understand when they are most impactful and in which combination these effects appear.

With two news-based measures on war, I document that managers mitigated war risk through dividend cuts, arguably to establish a war chest. Moreover, I find that companies postponed their initial public offerings and that foreign companies were more likely to delist after the onset of wars. Investors reacted negatively to the increase in war news coverage. There is evidence of mean-reversion after a threat of war and a negative drift following the start of war. Finally, I highlight the importance of proximity to military conflicts. In general, the evidence indicates that both managers and investors became more risk averse as a consequence of war news.

"It is ironic that the travelogue of a French aristocrat became one of the canonical texts of American democracy. Even today, American liberals and conservatives rely on De la Démocratie en Amérique to support their arguments and assume that Tocqueville's insights, including his conviction that voluntary associations are the bedrock of American democracy, are still relevant today. However, in a historical and transnational perspective, Tocqueville's famous passages in Democracy in America are as unexceptional as the American society of his time, given the enthusiasm for associative sociability by eighteenth and nineteenth-century practitioners of civil society in France, Germany, the Habsburg Empire and Russia. Revisiting the history of these 'sociable societies' provides an answer to the question whether voluntary associations can be considered schools for democracy or not." (author's abstract)

AbstractThis article explores the way in which the Spanish and the Swiss legations in Japan acted and reacted to violent change in the international environment. By looking at the period of Japanese wartime aggression in Asia and the Pacific from 1931–1945, it analyzes key moments for both diplomatic missions, when changes abroad or at home led their respective diplomats to take a stance beyond the regular representation of national interests. The article argues that violent conflicts impacted the diplomatic behavior of the legations in Japan heavily. They were shaped by new policies in reaction to the violence, while sometimes also engaging in shaping such policies themselves.

AbstractMany consumer choices nowadays involve ethical considerations (e.g., when buying clothes consumers can often choose between a standard and an ethically produced collection). Previous work has shown that how people feel after such ethically connotated consumer choices is a central determinant of their future ethical consumer behavior. However, most of that research focuses on the effect of choice outcomes (ethical vs. unethical product) on emotional and behavioral reactions. Challenging this outcome‐focused approach, the present paper proposes that the experience of conflict (e.g., between ethical goals vs. self‐interest) during decision‐making has a significant additional effect on emotional reactions and future behavior. Results from one fully powered, preregistered study (N = 383) showed that conflict strength predicted increased negative post‐choice emotions and reduced choice satisfaction. Importantly, this pattern occurred for ethical as well as unethical choice outcomes. Conflict also increased the likelihood of making the opposite choice in a subsequent ethical consumer choice situation—again independent of participants' prior choice. Those results are an important extension of previous work as they highlight the importance of taking experienced conflict into account when predicting post‐choice emotions and future ethical consumer behavior.

The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of democracy Education on efforts to handle, prevent, and recover from post-economic, political, and social conflicts in East Java, precisely in Kediri Regency. The research method used is qualitative. The research technique used is joint research that is the normative-empirical study and social science to know how the implementation of the democracy education of the people of Kediri Regency. The findings revealed that the application of democracy education had an impact on the economic, political, and social conflict management of the people of Kediri Regency. Especially from the life of the town during the General Election period, Regional Head Election, and Village Head Election, which seemed more peaceful than in the Era of Political Dynasty. The economic and social life of the community is much better now, especially during the social distancing policy, the town can survive economically and get involved in handling Covid-19. Kediri regency shows that social tolerance is extreme. This research contributes to the future of the legal and policy bodies of the local government of the Kediri regency in handling economic, political, and social conflicts that exist in the community. In the end, the law and the democratic system can minimize intolerance and lawless behavior that can hamper economic development.

Objective: To examine how the perception of work-family conflict relates to the share of parents in women's and men's direct coworking environments. Background: The idea of relational demography posits that individuals' relative positions within their coworking environments have an impact on their wellbeing. Depending on women's and men's parenthood status and the corresponding (dis-)similarity compared to their colleagues, this idea was applied to the perception of work-to-family and family-to-work conflicts. Method: Time-based and strain-based work-to-family and family-to-work conflicts were analyzed by gender and parenthood with random effects panel regression models using longitudinal data from the LEEP-B3-survey, a large-scale linked employer-employee survey from Germany (2012/2013 and 2014/2015; 2,228 women and 2,656 men). The composition of the respondents' working groups was included as a moderating variable. Results: Mothers and fathers of children aged 0-11 years reported higher work-to-family and family-to-work conflicts than parents of older children and childless women and men. For mothers of children aged 0-11 years, a higher share of parents in their working groups was associated with less time-based family-to-work conflict. For fathers of children aged 0-11 years, the same associations were found for overall work-to-family conflict, strain-based work-to-family conflict as well as for all dimensions of family-to-work conflict. Conclusion: Similarity between the team members regarding parenthood seemed to reduce mothers' and fathers' perceptions of work-family conflict beyond several other characteristics of the individuals and the workplaces.

A relatively large body of research emphasizes the vital role of the tenure of leaders in explaining conflict behavior. In some accounts, new leaders are more likely to be attacked than their more seasoned counterparts. But are all new leaders equally susceptible to challenge? This research note argues that a key characteristic of leaders – whether or not they have combat experience prior to assuming office – influences their exposure to attacks from abroad. Analyses of dyadic interactions, 1900–2001, reveal that new leaders with combat experience are almost three times more likely to be targeted than leaders without a history of combat. Moreover, while time in office tends to increase the likelihood of conflict involvement generally, for leaders with combat experience, the risk of conflict declines across their tenure.