Search results

This study explores the effect of video assistant referee (VAR) sponsorship on spectator response and compares it with advertising and conventional sponsorship.

An experiment with 809 subjects is conducted by analyzing 20 one-minute video clip stimuli from a Premier League soccer game divided into four formats: two formats of VAR sponsorship, advertising, and conventional sponsorship.

The results show that the indicators of recall, credibility, and perceived congruence improve when the VAR sponsorship format is used.

This is the first manuscript to examine the effectiveness of a new type of sponsorship: VAR sponsorship. This manuscript provides metrics that will guide practitioners on whether to use this type of sponsorship.

Meals on Wheels (MOW) support older people to live in their own homes and communities. The purpose of this paper is to explore MOW experiences from a multi-stakeholder level to inform and better equip this valuable service.

A qualitative approach was undertaken utilising semi-structured interviews and focus groups with current, former and potential MOW service users and MOW stakeholders.

Qualitative analysis explored MOW perspectives and experiences, highlighting a lack of MOW information and awareness, the importance of a client-centred approach the multiple roles of MOW and service transition.

This research explores MOW from the perspective of different groups directly involved in this community service, offering unique multi-stakeholder insights to understand and guide the future of this service.

This study aims to provide an overview of studies concerning bias in law, particularly in judges’ decisions. The authors intend to bring to light the factors that can most frequently lead to unequal decisions to enable judges to better perform their function.

A literature review was used as a methodology based on studies involving judges and juries.

The evidence reported by this review suggests how difficult the judge’s job is and how they can be unconsciously influenced by inferences, deductions and biases. The results show that the pleasantness of the witness and the confidence they exhibit during testification are crucial factors in influencing the decisions of judges and jurors. From these studies, it can be assumed that different personal aspects – smiling, pleasantness and the witness’s credibility – can be positively associated with each other, which could compromise the ongoing evaluation. Gender is another factor that can influence evaluations; in fact, witnesses are evaluated based on their own “gender” as well as that of the jurors. Another essential factor is self-confidence. Also, the age of both of the judge and of the witness can be a factor that influences decisions in court. Other factors such as communication effectiveness, degree of accuracy of reported information and non-verbal behaviour were also found to be important.

Among the limitations of this research, the authors have to consider the low number of available research and that the most of these derive from a specific cultural context – the American one. There may also be limits to the way in which certain concepts are used in different parts of the world, particularly through a very broad construct, such as the credibility of witness.

This study highlights which inferences and biases can characterise decision-making processes and, above all, highlights the need for specific training courses aimed at managing the many processes involved in influencing human decisions.

The authors believe that this work can raise awareness about the series of unconscious reasoning that may happen in the legal field, which has a major impact on people’s lives and on the general perception of justice.

In this research, the authors have considered some of the criteria that may intervene in the evaluation of witnesses, those present in the current scientific literature. From the research, it seems appropriate and necessary to provide judges with adequate training aimed at the recognition of their cognitive processes and bias. In fact, when they were made aware of them, they were less affected by bias, resulting in more objective and limiting improper inferences.