Search results

The voices of children and young people have been largely neglected in discussions of the extent to which the internet takes into account their needs and concerns. This paper aims to highlight young people’s lived experiences of being online.

Results are drawn from the UnBias project’s youth led discussions, “Youth Juries” with young people predominantly aged between 13 and 17 years.

Whilst the young people are able to use their agency online in some circumstances, many often experience feelings of disempowerment and resignation, particularly in relation to the terms and conditions and user agreements that are ubiquitous to digital technologies, social media platforms and other websites.

Although changes are afoot as part of the General Data Protection Regulation (herein the GDPR) to simplify the terms and conditions of online platforms (European Union, 2016), it offers little practical guidance on how it should be implemented to children. The voices and opinions of children and young people are put forward as suggestions for how the “clear communication to data subjects” required by Article 12 of the GDPR in particular should be implemented, for example, recommendations about how terms and conditions can be made more accessible.

Children and young people are an often overlooked demographic of online users. This paper argues for the importance of this group being involved in any changes that may affect them, by putting forward recommendations from the children and young people themselves.

The purpose of this paper is to contribute to the empirical evidence about crop yield distributions that are often used in practical models evaluating crop yield risk and insurance. Additionally, a simulation approach is used to compare the performance of alternative specifications when the underlying form is not known, to identify implications for the choice of parameterization of yield distributions in modeling contexts.

Using a unique high-quality farm-level corn yield data set, commonly used parametric, semi-parametric, and non-parametric distributions are examined against widely used in-sample goodness-of-fit (GOF) measures. Then, a simulation framework is used to assess the out-of-sample characteristics by using known distributions to generate samples that are assessed in an insurance valuation context under alternative specifications of the yield distribution.

Bias and efficiency trade-offs are identified for both in- and out-of-sample contexts, including a simple insurance rating application. Use of GOF measures in small samples can lead to inappropriate selection of candidate distributions that perform poorly in straightforward economic applications. The β distribution consistently overstates rates even when fitted to data generated from a β distribution, while the Weibull consistently understates rates; though small sample features slightly favor Weibull. The TCMN and kernel density estimators are least biased in-sample, but can perform very badly out-of-sample due to overfitting issues. The TCMN performs reasonably well across sample sizes and initial conditions.

Economic applications should consider the consequence of bias vs efficiency in the selection of characterizations of yield risk. Parsimonious specifications often outperform more complex characterizations of yield distributions in small sample settings, and in cases where more demanding uses of extreme-event probabilities are required.

The study helps provide guidance on the selection of distributions used to characterize yield risk and provides an extensive empirical demonstration of yield risk measures across a high-quality set of actual farm experiences. The out-of-sample examination provides evidence of the impact of sample size, underlying variability, and region of the probability measure used on the performance of candidate distributions.

Rather than organize as traditional firms, many of today’s companies organize as platforms that sit at the nexus of multiple exchange and production relationships. This chapter considers a most basic question of organization in platform contexts: the choice of boundaries. Herein, I investigate how classical economic theories of firm boundaries apply to platform-based organization and empirically study how executives made boundary choices in response to changing market and technical challenges in the early mobile computing industry (the predecessor to today’s smartphones). Rather than a strict or unavoidable tradeoff between “openness-versus-control,” most successful platform owners chose their boundaries in a way to simultaneously open-up to outside developers while maintaining coordination across the entire system.

Anyone who has recently watched television or movies can tell you that transgender, gender nonbinary or gender expansive people are becoming more visible in these media. This trend reflects the reality that younger generations are increasingly identifying with more fluid and nonbinary gender and sexual identities and are progressively expressing those identities in a more flexible and changing manner (Herman et al., 2022; Wilson & Meyer, 2021). Unsurprisingly then, those individuals are also more visible at work, including in workplaces with employer-mandated dress codes. Indeed, in 2020 the US Supreme Court decided a case involving a transgender woman, Aimee Stephens, who was fired because her employer, a funeral home, required her to conform to its gender-binary dress policy and wear clothing mandatory for people assigned male at birth, rather than appropriate for her female gender identity ( Bostock v. Clayton County, 2020).

However, as the description of Aimee Stephens's own experience illustrates, often these employer appearance codes are based on a binary and fixed conception of gender and gender identity and expression at odds with the increasing number of workers who do not identify within those rigid parameters. Moreover, even when an employee, like Aimee Stephens herself, could have fit within her employer's dress code, the improper application of that policy to her, or employer concerns about customer or co-worker discomfort with an employee's appearance under the policy may mean that a worker's identity and expression may still conflict with a workplace appearance code. For gender nonbinary or nonconforming individuals, these complications are magnified.

This chapter explores the practical problems and barriers that employer dress codes have on employees whose gender identity and/or presentation move beyond the traditional male/female binary. Using insights from queer theory, gender expansive employees serve to interrogate fundamental assumptions behind workplace dress policies and the formal and informal ways in which these policies are policed. The chapter will explore that discordance, examine possible employer resolutions, and evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of those responses.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the effects of reconciliation and retaliation story endings on subsequent aggressive affect and behavior.

Participants took part in two ostensibly unrelated studies. The first involved reading a violent story, attributed to a biblical or secular source, which ended in either brutal retaliation or peaceful reconciliation. They then took part in a second study in which they completed measures of aggressive affect and behavior.

Participants told that their stories came from a secular source experienced a more aggressive affect than those told that their stories came from a biblical source. In terms of behavioral aggression, a significant difference in effect of the story ending on males and females emerged. Females who read the reconciliation ending had lower levels of behavioral aggression than females who read the retaliation ending. Conversely, males who read the reconciliation ending had higher levels of behavioral aggression than males who read the retaliation ending.

These findings suggest that media depictions of prosocial reactions to unprovoked aggression may not reduce aggression in men.

Results are discussed in terms of moral values espoused by women and men and suggest that anti-violence messages may be strengthened to the extent they address the values important to both.

This study extends research on violent media exposure to a burgeoning literature on reading violent content.

E‐Teaching as the use of information and communication technology (ICT) in education is of growing importance for educational theory and practice. Many universities and other higher education institutions use ICT to support teaching. However, there are contradicting opinions about the value and outcome of e‐teaching. This paper starts with a review of the literature on e‐teaching and uses this as a basis for distilling success factors for e‐teaching. It then discusses the case study of an e‐voting system used for giving student feedback and marking student presentations. The case study is critically discussed in the light of the success factors developed earlier. The conclusion is that e‐teaching, in order to be successful, should be embedded in the organisational and individual teaching philosophy.

The purpose of this paper is to examine factors affecting the use of forage index insurance. Forage is a difficult crop to insure, and index insurance may be well suited for forage insurance and has been implemented in several countries, including Canada, the USA and France. Despite being a promising risk management tool, forage index insurance participation rates in Canada, and other countries are low relative to crop insurance participation rates for grain and oilseed producers.

A survey was conducted with 87 beef and cattle producers from Alberta and Saskatchewan, Canada. A probit regression model was used, and a number of variables were included to examine the use of forage index insurance.

In total, 6 of 11 variables in the model are found to be statistically significant in explaining forage producers’ use of forage index insurance. Results suggest that producers who maintain lower feed reserves are more likely to purchase forage index insurance. Also, producers with higher levels of knowledge of crop insurance and a more positive attitude toward forage insurance are more likely to use forage index insurance. Furthermore, producers are more likely to use forage index insurance if they perceive drought and weather risk as being of greater importance, and if they are younger. The importance of the variable forage index insurance premium price was statistically insignificant. This could be due to the effect of subsidization, reducing the importance of price for the decision to purchase. Similarly, the use of other subsidized risk management policies, including a whole-farm margin policy (e.g. the government program and AgriStability), did not reduce forage index insurance use. A possible explanation for this is that the subsidization of the policies may make it profitable to purchase both, despite the overlapping coverage.

These results may be useful for policy makers interested in increasing forage index insurance participation rates, as forage index insurance participation rates have historically been low relative to grain and oilseed producers.

This study is believed to be one of the first studies regarding the use of forage index insurance by forage producers. Producers can be exposed to catastrophic risks such as drought or other extreme weather events, and forage index insurance may be an effective means to manage these risks. Index insurance determines payments using an index that is correlated to producers’ actual yields. A downside of this method is basis risk, which is the mismatch between the insured index and the producer’s actual yield. Research has focused on basis risk and developing improved methods to reduce basis risk. However, less research has investigated the other important factors that may contribute to forage index insurance use. Producers may have a different risk management environment regarding forage production compared to other farm activities, and these differences have largely not been examined.

The disparities of COVID-19 vaccination rates between the rural and urban areas have become apparent during this pandemic. There is a need to understand the root causes of vaccine hesitancy demonstrated by the rural population to increase coverage and to contain the disease spread throughout the United States. This study aimed to explore other factors influencing vaccine hesitancy among rural dwellers besides the geography-related barriers such as poor health care access and individuals having no or suboptimal insurance coverage.

By reviewing existing data and literature about vaccination, health literacy, and behaviors, and prevailing ideologies, we discuss the potential causes of vaccine hesitancy in rural areas that could create barriers for successful public health efforts related to vaccine coverage and provide suggestions to ameliorate the situation.

Geography-related barriers, health literacy, and preconceived notions are key determinants of adopting healthy behaviors and complying with public health authorities' recommendations among rural individuals during a public-health crisis. We argue that ideology, which is much deeper than preconception or misconception on vaccination, should be incorporated as a key factor to redefine the term “vulnerable populations” in public health research.

The limitation of our study is that we have not found an effective way to encourage the populations who hold conservative religious and political ideologies to join the efforts for public health. Even though geography-related barriers may strongly impact the rural dwellers in achieving optimal health, the various forms of ideologies they have toward certain health behaviors cannot be discounted to understand and address vaccine-related disparities in rural areas. There is a need to redefine the term “vulnerable population” particularly as it relates to rural areas in the United States. During large-scale public health disasters, scholars and public health authorities should consider the ideologies of individuals, in addition to other factors such as race/ethnicity, area of residence (rural vs. urban), and socioeconomic factors influencing the existing vulnerabilities and health disparities.