Search results

The study of markets encompasses a number of disciplines – including anthropology, economics, history, and sociology – and a larger number of theoretical frameworks (see Plattner, 1989; Reddy, 1984; Smelser & Swedberg, 1994). Despite this disciplinary and theoretical diversity, scholarship on markets tends toward either realist or constructionist accounts (Dobbin, 1994; Dowd & Dobbin, forthcoming).¹ Realist accounts treat markets as extant arenas that mostly (or should) conform to a singular ideal-type. Realists thus take the existence of markets as given and examine factors that supposedly shape all markets in a similar fashion. When explaining market outcomes, they tout such factors as competition, demand, and technology; moreover, they can treat the impact of these factors as little influenced by context. Constructionist accounts treat markets as emergent arenas that result in a remarkable variety of types. They problematize the existence of markets and examine how contextual factors contribute to this variety. When explaining market outcomes, some show that social relations and/or cultural assumptions found in a particular setting can qualify the impact of competition (Uzzi, 1997), demand (Peiss, 1998), and technology (Fischer, 1992). Constructionists thus stress the contingent, rather than universal, processes that shape markets.

In this chapter, the authors utilize both risk and resilience as conceptual frameworks to discuss the academic and psychosocial development of African American adolescent males. Given the amount of attention placed on the academic underachievement of African American males, they explore popular academic themes, such as academic disidentification and the role of teachers and parents. The authors examine psychosocial themes related to racial and athletic identity, the phenomenon of cool pose and “acting Black,” and the development of alternative masculinities. They conclude the chapter with recommendations for education research, practice and policy.

Purpose – Role-taking refusal was a foundational problem in Mead's work but was ignored by subsequent interactionists who focused on the benefits of role-taking – empathy and solidarity – but failed to examine how they are destroyed or crippled from emerging as inclusionary aspects of social consciousness. Role-taking refusal constitutes both the microfoundation of dehumanization in the case of the oppressor and, in the case of the oppressed, the microfoundation of resistance. Role-taking refusal is linked to Giddens's notion of the reflective project of the self, Omi and Winant's racial formation theory, Feagin's theory of systemic racism, and the perspective of Critical Race Theory.

Methodology – I shall portray role-taking refusal by using historical, theoretical, and empirical works, especially ethnographic studies.

Social implications – The oppressed know the image their oppressors have of them. Refusing to internalize this image is the first step – the microfoundation – of resistance. Role-taking refusal in the oppressed fosters critical consciousness, which, if solidarity with others is formed, can lead to collective action and, possibly, permanent institutional change.

Originality – “The superiority delusion” is the paradigmatic ideology of all oppressors, deployed to justify their power, privilege, and prestige. This delusion is maintained by the microfoundation of dehumanization, which is a systematic refusal to role-take from those over whom oppressors oppress. All other ideologies that justify oppression are derived from some form of “the superiority delusion,” identifying for the first time role-taking refusal as paradoxically both the original sin of social relations and the foundation of social resistance.

Purpose – The chapter examines the relationship between Black elected officials (as candidates and in office) and the media that covers them by examining how media use race when discussing these officials.Design/methodology/approach – The chapter uses a content analysis design. The basic strategy is to examine eight years’ worth of discussion in newspapers, both in Ohio and nationwide, concerning Mark Mallory as he runs for mayor of Cincinnati and then acts as mayor from 2005 to mid-2012.Findings – The chapter provides information on how the media (mainstream media and Black media) includes racial mentions when discussing Mark Mallory. The findings support my two main hypotheses: that Mark Mallory is more heavily racialized as a mayoral candidate in mainstream newspapers than he is as a sitting mayor, and that for Black newspapers, he is more heavily racialized at either stage (candidate or sitting mayor) than he is with mainstream newspapers.Research limitations/implications – Because the research only looks at one individual, the findings lack generalizability. Therefore, researchers should expand the focus to examine more Black elected officials and/or Black candidates for office.Practical and social implications – The chapter shows how discussions of race around a Black elected official may be beyond that official’s control.Originality/value – This chapter is original in showing how race can be made a part of the public media discussions of minority elected officials. The research design gives us a template for future study of the influence of race in media representations in minority politics.

As historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs) endeavor to establish niches in the higher education marketplace, we see a surfeit of HBCU executives, administrators, alumni, faculty, and student voices leading the public discourse about how twenty-first century solutions are being sought to serve the needs of an increasingly ethnically and culturally diverse educational sector. Journalistic missives and research produced in academia examine and often define HBCUs struggling to garner federal/external research dollars, struggling to attract, engage, and support diverse student populations, lacking innovation, failing to promote and foster cooperation and interdisciplinarity, and failing to promote esprit de corps among faculty. These missives are often the result of externally produced news stories which permeate because of a lack of engagement among traditional media outlets and journalists with “on-the-ground” thought leaders working with HBCU students and students themselves.

Featuring the collaborative efforts of racially diverse faculty from multiple disciplines, producing research and providing service to racially, culturally, and geographically diverse students, the student service-based research project discussed in the chapter aims to provide differential academic and employment-support services to transition HBCU students with learning disabilities leading to improved college completion and employment outcome by emphasizing cooperation in the classroom and through extracurricular activities. Further, it accomplishes something equally critical to its research-based outcomes – a model of collaboration and cooperation other HBCUs should seek to replicate for the sake of its students, faculty, and institutional reputations.

The program described in this chapter is just one example of programs that serve students and exemplify the mission of HBCUs, while demonstrating innovation, collaboration, and leadership, that creates an opportunity to counter-narrate pernicious stereotypes about HBCUs. The federally-funded, innovative student services/success program I examine in this chapter – a collaborative, multidepartment, and interdisciplinary program emphasizing cooperative learning at a southern flagship HBCU – challenges these pernicious narratives head on. Raising attention and awareness of the program’s existence is important not only to highlight the university’s attempts to promote student success, but is also another clarion call for HBCUs to do all within their power to promote their own successes at attracting, retaining, and promoting students’ success while finding creative ways to develop faculty and promote interdisciplinarity and collaboration. Doing so benefits all HBCU students regardless of their race, cultural affinities, or level of preparedness for college, and benefits all faculty, be they in the much-vaunted science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields or often lesser-valued, but equally crucial fields in the humanities, education, and the arts.

Over the last decade, international accounting harmonization and convergence with the increasing adoption of IFRS as national accounting standards have become dominant topics in international accounting research (Ashbaugh & Pincus, 2001; Chand & Patel, 2008; Christensen et al., 2007; Daske & Gebhardt, 2006; Daske et al., 2008; Ding et al., 2007; Hellmann et al., 2010; Lantto & Sahlström, 2008; Larson & Kenny, 2011; Peng & van der Laan Smith, 2010; Rezaee et al., 2010; Tyrrall et al., 2007). Given that the primary goal of international convergence is enhancing comparability of financial statements across countries, the influence of accountants’ professional judgment in the interpretation and application of accounting standards has increasingly been recognized as an important and controversial topic. Indeed, a growing number of studies have analyzed the influence of culture on standard setting (Bloom & Naciri, 1989; Ding et al., 2005; Schultz & Lopez, 2001), auditor independence (Agacer & Doupnik, 1991; Hwang et al., 2008; Patel & Psaros, 2000), and accountants’ values and judgments (Doupnik & Riccio, 2006; Doupnik & Richter, 2003, 2004; Patel, 2003). Although prior research has provided evidence that culture influences accountants’ exercise of professional judgments, these studies have largely focused on demonstrating differences between accountants from very distinct cultures or accounting systems. For example, Chand (2008) as well as Doupnik and Richter (2004) examined differences in the judgment of professional accountants with regard to the interpretation and application of uncertainty expressions by comparing Australian and Fijian and German and American accountants, respectively. Moreover, recent research on professional accountants’ judgments (Chand, 2008; Doupnik & Riccio, 2006; Doupnik & Richter, 2003) has largely focused on providing evidence that accountants from different accounting clusters significantly differ in their exercise of professional judgment. Indeed, researchers have often based their country selections on theoretical models of accounting clusters such as Gray's (1988) framework of accounting values or Nobes’ (1983) international accounting classification, predominantly to show differences between the Anglo-American accounting model and the Continental European accounting model.