Suchergebnisse

Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to define the sustainable university in Turkey, by considering perspectives of various stakeholders such as experts, intellectual, public, political parties and media using public opinion formation analysis. The paper aims to re-define the "sustainable university" with all dimensions including environmental, economic and social factors in Turkey.


Design/methodology/approach
In this study, the model of shaping the policy agenda and public opinion formation by certain groups, presented by Papadakis (1996), was used to determine the main characteristics of a sustainable university. Based on this model, the researchers collected data from intellectuals, experts, political parties, media and public simultaneously. Focus groups and archival search were used.


Findings
The results of the public opinion formation process presented that the definition of sustainable universities in Turkey includes the economic, ecological and social aspects and a holistic view of different groups. The findings of the study presented that the definition of sustainable universities in Turkey has many facets. Different groups in the public opinion formation process share almost similar views, though these points are usually mentioned under different headings. Thus, nearly each respondent in the public opinion formation process discusses the concept of being a "trade mark" as a university.


Research limitations/implications
The research may lack generalizability, as it takes place in Turkey, which is a non-Western country.


Practical implications
The research sheds a light for universities, which are the major cornerstones of higher education, especially in the area of sustainability and sustainable development. Also, universities have a great impact in regional development, which stresses once again the importance of sustainability in higher education. They should modify their education programs and curricula in accordance with sustainability. University–industry cooperation should be provided. They should manage to become a trademark.


Social implications
Universities being the major cornerstones of higher education play a vital role in regional development of countries; therefore, their sustainable development should be well handled to enable regional development.


Originality/value
The universities are the major actors which should pursue sustainability, as they affect society. The studies on sustainability and universities have been generally grouped under two main subjects in the literature. First group of studies highlights the support of universities for sustainability of corporations, whereas other studies stress the importance of becoming a sustainable university. There are not many studies on this subject which considers the public opinion formation process throughout the literature; therefore, this study contributes to the literature with this aspect. The study takes place in Izmir, Turkey, which is a non-Western country. Most of the studies on this subject take place in Western countries, so as the study is deployed in a non-Western country, it reflects a different point of view.

This study undertakes an empirical test of the "bandwagon effect"—individuals rallying to the majority opinion. The study is done outside the electoral context on two issues: abortion and the constitutional future of Quebec. A panel is used, as well as an experimental design in which respondents are told the state and direction of public opinion. Three methodological criteria are used as minimal requirements for a satisfac tory test of the bandwagon thesis. "Underdogging," as well as opinion movement due to factors outside the experiment, are both accounted for. Though the reasons for a bandwagon remain unclear, the authors demon strate that a bandwagon effect of 5-7 percent existed on both issues.

Many studies in cognitive linguistics have highlighted the important role of metaphors in political discourse, and more specifically their ability to frame complex concepts (Lakoff 1996). The key question is however under which conditions different framings lead to different representations of such complex political issues. Using an experimental design, this paper tackles the question of the framing impact of metaphors by focusing on the opportunity to implement a basic income (BI) system in a given polity. We take advantage of the preliminary stage of the BI debate in Belgium to study the influence of discursive strategies on the opinion formation process of individuals. As De Wispelaere and Noguera (2012) highlighted, the framing of the BI proposal may significantly increase its psychological feasibility. Carefully choosing the arguments employed to address this question can help avoid triggering negative perceptions and ensure positive attitudes toward this policy. While most studies on the BI so far have been either normative or descriptive, our experiment aims at determining to what extent the confrontation of individuals to metaphors illustrating the BI system impact the way they apprehend its implementation in Belgium. We show that very light variations in an informative text can induce major differences in the opinion formation process of the participants. This suggests that, when a debate is controversial and ambiguous, citizens' opinions are sensitive to framing effects. BI proponents or opponents should thus pay particular attention to which arguments and metaphors are put forward in the public debate, as this could modify its outcome.

Many studies in cognitive linguistics have highlighted the important role of metaphors in political discourse, and more specifically their ability to frame complex concepts (Lakoff 1996). The key question is however under which conditions different framings lead to different representations of such complex political issues. Using an experimental design, this paper tackles the question of the framing impact of metaphors by focusing on the opportunity to implement a basic income (BI) system in a given polity. We take advantage of the preliminary stage of the BI debate in Belgium to study the influence of discursive strategies on the opinion formation process of individuals. As De Wispelaere and Noguera (2012) highlighted, the framing of the BI proposal may significantly increase its psychological feasibility. Carefully choosing the arguments employed to address this question can help avoid triggering negative perceptions and ensure positive attitudes toward this policy. While most studies on the BI so far have been either normative or descriptive, our experiment aims at determining to what extent the confrontation of individuals to metaphors illustrating the BI system impact the way they apprehend its implementation in Belgium. We show that very light variations in an informative text can induce major differences in the opinion formation process of the participants. This suggests that, when a debate is controversial and ambiguous, citizens' opinions are sensitive to framing effects. BI proponents or opponents should thus pay particular attention to which arguments and metaphors are put forward in the public debate, as this could modify its outcome.

A revised version of this paper has been published in: "Basic Income Studies : an international journal of basic income research" - Vol. 13, no. 2, p. 1-16 https://dial.uclouvain.be/pr/boreal/object/boreal:206958 Many studies in cognitive linguistics have highlighted the important role of metaphors in political discourse, and more specifically their ability to frame complex concepts (Lakoff 1996). The key question is however under which conditions different framings lead to different representations of such complex political issues. Using an experimental design, this paper tackles the question of the framing impact of metaphors by focusing on the opportunity to implement a basic income (BI) system in a given polity. We take advantage of the preliminary stage of the BI debate in Belgium to study the influence of discursive strategies on the opinion formation process of individuals. As De Wispelaere and Noguera (2012) highlighted, the framing of the BI proposal may significantly increase its psychological feasibility. Carefully choosing the arguments employed to address this question can help avoid triggering negative perceptions and ensure positive attitudes toward this policy. While most studies on the BI so far have been either normative or descriptive, our experiment aims at determining to what extent the confrontation of individuals to metaphors illustrating the BI system impact the way they apprehend its implementation in Belgium. We show that very light variations in an informative text can induce major differences in the opinion formation process of the participants. This suggests that, when a debate is controversial and ambiguous, citizens' opinions are sensitive to framing effects. BI proponents or opponents should thus pay particular attention to which arguments and metaphors are put forward in the public debate, as this could modify its outcome.

A revised version of this paper has been published in: "Basic Income Studies : an international journal of basic income research" - Vol. 13, no. 2, p. 1-16 https://dial.uclouvain.be/pr/boreal/object/boreal:206958 Many studies in cognitive linguistics have highlighted the important role of metaphors in political discourse, and more specifically their ability to frame complex concepts (Lakoff 1996). The key question is however under which conditions different framings lead to different representations of such complex political issues. Using an experimental design, this paper tackles the question of the framing impact of metaphors by focusing on the opportunity to implement a basic income (BI) system in a given polity. We take advantage of the preliminary stage of the BI debate in Belgium to study the influence of discursive strategies on the opinion formation process of individuals. As De Wispelaere and Noguera (2012) highlighted, the framing of the BI proposal may significantly increase its psychological feasibility. Carefully choosing the arguments employed to address this question can help avoid triggering negative perceptions and ensure positive attitudes toward this policy. While most studies on the BI so far have been either normative or descriptive, our experiment aims at determining to what extent the confrontation of individuals to metaphors illustrating the BI system impact the way they apprehend its implementation in Belgium. We show that very light variations in an informative text can induce major differences in the opinion formation process of the participants. This suggests that, when a debate is controversial and ambiguous, citizens' opinions are sensitive to framing effects. BI proponents or opponents should thus pay particular attention to which arguments and metaphors are put forward in the public debate, as this could modify its outcome.

A revised version of this paper has been published in: "Basic Income Studies : an international journal of basic income research" - Vol. 13, no. 2, p. 1-16 https://dial.uclouvain.be/pr/boreal/object/boreal:206958 This paper focuses on a timely political issue by addressing the debate of the opportunity to implement a basic income system in a given polity. Basic income (BI) can be defined as "an income paid by a political community to all its members, on an individual basis, without means-test or compensation requirement" (Vanderborght and Van Parijs, 2005). This is an ongoing debate in Belgium, both in academia and in the public sphere. However, this debate has not yet entered the legislative process as such. This is still much more a societal issue that has not been translated into concrete policy proposals. We take advantage of this preliminary stage of the BI debate to study the influence of discursive strategies on the opinion formation process of individuals. For doing so, we ran an experiment in which some participants were stimulated with some arguments that could be used in the BI debate while others did receive either a neutral text or no text at all. We even added three groups who received a text containing one argument and a metaphor underlying this argument. Metaphors are indeed said to impact political preferences in a much more powerful way than arguments alone. The goal of our experiment is to assess the influence of arguments and metaphors on the opinion formation process. We asked participants to take position in the debate about the controversial issue of BI and analysed their written outputs to uncover whether their content was influence by the text they read right before.

A revised version of this paper has been published in: "Basic Income Studies : an international journal of basic income research" - Vol. 13, no. 2, p. 1-16 https://dial.uclouvain.be/pr/boreal/object/boreal:206958 This paper focuses on a timely political issue by addressing the debate of the opportunity to implement a basic income system in a given polity. Basic income (BI) can be defined as "an income paid by a political community to all its members, on an individual basis, without means-test or compensation requirement" (Vanderborght and Van Parijs, 2005). This is an ongoing debate in Belgium, both in academia and in the public sphere. However, this debate has not yet entered the legislative process as such. This is still much more a societal issue that has not been translated into concrete policy proposals. We take advantage of this preliminary stage of the BI debate to study the influence of discursive strategies on the opinion formation process of individuals. For doing so, we ran an experiment in which some participants were stimulated with some arguments that could be used in the BI debate while others did receive either a neutral text or no text at all. We even added three groups who received a text containing one argument and a metaphor underlying this argument. Metaphors are indeed said to impact political preferences in a much more powerful way than arguments alone. The goal of our experiment is to assess the influence of arguments and metaphors on the opinion formation process. We asked participants to take position in the debate about the controversial issue of BI and analysed their written outputs to uncover whether their content was influence by the text they read right before.

Based on a session of the Fifth annual conference on public opinion research, sponsored by the Am. association for public opinion research and the World association for public opinion research, Lake Forest, Ill., June 15-20, 1950.