Search results

In this paper I want to look at just one of the many contemporary legal narratives of homophobia – the phenomenon of the “Homosexual Advance Defence” (H.A.D.). While I agree with the analysis of one American commentator, who indicts the H.A.D. as a “judicial institutionalization of homophobia” (Mison, 1992, p. 136), I maintain that it is important to extend analyses which take as their main target the entrenchment of bigoted judicial views or which employ as their main critical tool a liberal framework of equality and discrimination (for example, see Potter, 2001). Just as Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick urges us not to view homophobia as simple ignorance or bigotry (see Howe, 2000, pp. 85–87), I argue that there is much more at stake with the H.A.D., and consequently much more required of us, than mere questions of ignorance, discrimination and (re-)education. While it is important to identify and condemn at every turn the various legal and social manifestations of homophobia, of which the H.A.D. is clearly one, it is just as important (if not more so) to interrogate the discursive and epistemological foundations, or legitimations, of these very beliefs.

The contours of the question of transmission or jurisdiction receive a particularly sharp delineation in a recent judgment from the annals of contempt of court. How can the solicitor scandalise the court, without destroying the law? Consider Anissa v Parsons. It involves the doctrine of contempt by scandalising – the most feudal of the three legally recognised types of contempt used to keep “the streams of justice clear and pure.”⁵ And the question that the judgment confronts is the technical and representational ordering of law, and specifically the articulation and disarticulation of two orders – that of the court and that of law.

Existing regulatory frameworks for identifying and treating historic buildings and places reflect deference to expert rule, which privilege the values of a small number of heritage experts over the values of the majority of people who visit, work, and reside in historic environments. To address this problem, the purpose of this paper is to explore a fundamental shift in how US federal and local preservation laws address built heritage by suggesting a dynamic, adaptive regulatory framework that incorporates heterodox approaches to heritage and therefore is capable of accommodating contemporary sociocultural values.

The overall approach the authors use is a comparative literature review from the fields of heterodox/orthodox heritage, heterodox/orthodox law, adaptive management, and participatory methods to inform the creation of a dynamic, adaptive regulatory framework.

Heterodox heritage emphasizes the need for a bottom-up, stakeholder-driven process, where everyday people’s values have the opportunity to be considered as being as valid as those of conventional experts. Orthodox law cannot accommodate this pluralistic approach, so heterodox law is required because, like heterodox heritage, it deconstructs power, values participation, and community involvement.

Orthodox heritage conservation practice disempowers most stakeholders and empowers conventional experts; this power differential is maintained by orthodox law.

To date, there have been few, if any, attempts to address critical heritage studies theory in the context of the regulatory environment. This paper appears to be the first such investigation in the literature.

There is a rising number of Asian brands expanding to Western nations. However, one of the biggest challenges is their reputation of inferior quality. The objectives of this research are to examine the U.S. consumers’ quality perception of Asian brands and what steps can be taken to improve their perceived quality to ultimately influence patronage intentions. This study also considers how age influences U.S. consumers’ perceived quality and patronage intentions.

An online experiment using 328 U.S. female subjects was conducted to examine how quality cues (brand origin and product design) influence their perceived quality of Asian brands. The study also examines how age (due to different levels of exposure of Asian brands) moderates the relationship between product cues and perceived quality.

The findings showed that there was a difference between the younger (Generation X and Y) and older (Baby boomers and Swing) group’s perceived quality of these Asian brand origins, namely Japan and China. Product design had an impact on perceived quality, but age was not a moderating factor.

Chinese and Japanese brands can use these differences in perception of brand origins to market accordingly. Product design cues can also be used effectively to both age groups by Asian brands to improve the perceived quality of U.S. consumers.

This research provides novel insight on U.S. consumers’ perceived quality and patronage intentions from different Asian brand cues. The study also contributes to the body of literature on how the relationship between specific Asian brand cues and perceived quality may differ as a function of age.

This study examines the use of linear regressions that include interaction terms, finding frequent interpretation errors in published accounting research. We provide insights on how to estimate, interpret, and present interactive regression models, and explain seldom-used but easily-implemented methods to report conditional marginal effects. We also examine the use of interaction terms in tax and financial reporting trade-off studies, evaluating the conceptual fit between a regression model with interactions and alternative definitions of trade-off. Although we advocate the use of interactive models, noise levels common in accounting research greatly reduce the ability to detect interaction effects.

The purpose of this paper is to integrate literature in the pioneer brand advantage area with the literature on reference prices to examine how reference prices work in a pioneer and follower brand context. There is evidence to suggest that pioneers have a psychological advantage over follower brands, yet how that manifests in terms of reference price effects is not fully understood. The study tests whether the pioneer price and follower price have equal influence on reference prices, or whether the pioneer has a stronger influence.

This research uses a longitudinal experiment to simulate a market of a pioneer brand followed by follower brand, and measures the relative effects of pioneer and follower prices on reference price, value perceptions and purchase intentions. This approach allows greater confidence in the causal nature of the findings.

The results indicate a clear and strong causal effect for the pioneer's price on price and value perceptions of the pioneer and follower, whereas the follower's price only seems to influence perceptions of the follower, not the pioneer. This suggests that consumers overweight the price of the pioneer brand (as exemplar) in the category, and reference price perceptions are systematically biased in its direction. However, these effects were stronger for the more innovative product category being examined. For a less innovative pioneer this effect was not so strong. These findings imply that reference price is brand specific but the more innovative the pioneer brand the more influence it has on reference prices.

These findings are consistent with and extend the literature on pioneer advantage by suggesting that the pioneer can define ideal levels of objective attributes such as price, rather than just defining the ideal attribute combination of subjective, less discernible attributes. This highlights and presents a more complete picture of the natural advantages to product innovation. It also implies the need to consider the multi‐faceted nature of reference price in measurement and research.

A number of studies have examined reference price effects in existing and established product categories. Yet few studies have examined reference price effects in new product categories despite calls in the literature to do so. This study is one of the first studies to examine reference price effects in new product categories and contributes by integrating the literature on pioneer brand advantage with the literature on reference price by examining asymmetric pricing effects between pioneer and follower brands in new product categories.

This paper seeks to describe and discuss a tagging experiment involving images related to Israeli and Jewish cultural heritage. The aim of this experiment was to compare freely assigned tags with values (free text) assigned to predefined metadata elements.

Two groups of participants were asked to provide tags for 12 images. The first group of participants was asked to assign descriptive tags to the images without guidance (unstructured tagging), while the second group was asked to provide free‐text values to predefined metadata elements (structured tagging).

The results show that on the one hand structured tagging provides guidance to the users, but on the other hand different interpretations of the meaning of the elements may worsen the tagging quality instead of improving it. In addition, unstructured tagging allows for a wider range of tags.

The recommendation is to experiment with a system where the users provide both the tags and the context of these tags.

Unstructured tagging has become highly popular on the web, thus it is important to evaluate its merits and shortcomings compared to more conventional methods.

Chapter 18 closes the book with twelve principles relevant for doing case study research. The chapter includes brief discussions of specific must-read literature for each principle. The discussion also emphasizes that accuracy (validity) comes first, not generality. The chapter emphasizes that the dominant logic in seeking generality by using surveys whereby informants write-out answers, tick boxes, and never have the opportunity to answer questions that they themselves frame fails to deliver accuracy except possibly when informants are describing evaluating their own recent experiences (see Chapter 2 for further details). The following key thoughts signify the twelve principles:

• •

  Configural not net effects

• •

  Unconscious not conscious thinking

• •

  Dynamic not cross sectional designs

• •

  Multiple routes not one model only

• •

  Predictive validity not only a best fitting model

• •

  Context not context free

• •

  Conjunctive-disjunctive not compensatory decision-making

• •

  Systems thinking not independent versus dependent conditions

• •

  Multi-person not one-person

• •

  Satisfy not optimize decisions

• •

  Unobtrusive evidence not just obtrusive interviews or observations

• •

  Visual not just verbal data collection and interpretation.

Configural not net effects

Unconscious not conscious thinking

Dynamic not cross sectional designs

Multiple routes not one model only

Predictive validity not only a best fitting model

Context not context free

Conjunctive-disjunctive not compensatory decision-making

Systems thinking not independent versus dependent conditions

Multi-person not one-person

Satisfy not optimize decisions

Unobtrusive evidence not just obtrusive interviews or observations

Visual not just verbal data collection and interpretation.

If we are concerned about the imprecision of case studies as research data, we can console ourselves by noting that a man named Darwin was able to write about a study of the Galapagos Islands and a few other cases. To the best of my recollection, there are not statistics in Darwin's book (Simon, 1991, p. 128).