Search results

1 – 10 of over 71000
To view the access options for this content please click here
Book part
Publication date: 7 September 2012

James Langenfeld and Brad Noffsker

In a number of recent multi-billion dollar cases brought against cigarette manufacturers, plaintiffs have in part alleged that the cigarette manufacturers (1) conspired…

Abstract

In a number of recent multi-billion dollar cases brought against cigarette manufacturers, plaintiffs have in part alleged that the cigarette manufacturers (1) conspired not to compete on the basis of health claims or the introduction of potentially safer cigarettes since the 1950s, and (2) engaged in fraudulent advertising by making implied health claims in advertisements selling ‘low tar’/‘light’ cigarettes. In this type of litigation, defendants’ actions could be due to alleged illegal behaviour as asserted by plaintiffs, or be the result of market forces that may have nothing to do with allegedly inappropriate acts. We examine the economic evidence relating to these allegations, taking into account some of the major influences on cigarette company behaviour. In particular, our analyses show that much of the cigarette manufactures’ behaviour can be explained by Federal Trade Commission and related government actions, rather than conspiracy or fraudulent acts. We find the economic evidence is inconsistent with an effective conspiracy to suppress information on either smoking and health or the development and marketing of potentially safer cigarettes. Regarding ‘lower tar’ and ‘light’ cigarettes, the economic evidence indicates that the cigarette manufacturers responded to government and public health initiatives, and that disclosing more information on smoking compensation earlier than the cigarette companies did would not have had any significant impact on smoking behaviour.

Details

Research in Law and Economics
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-1-78052-898-4

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 18 April 2008

Natcha Thawesaengskulthai and James D.T. Tannock

The variety of possible quality management (QM) and continuous improvement (CI) initiatives and their various possible permutations can make it difficult for a company to…

Abstract

Purpose

The variety of possible quality management (QM) and continuous improvement (CI) initiatives and their various possible permutations can make it difficult for a company to choose the best approach for their requirements. This paper aims to address the selection issue by presenting a method to compare popular QM and CI initiatives from the perspective of the pay‐offs, or expected benefits, to an organisation which successfully adopts the approach.

Design/methodology/approach

The relevant QM and CI literature was analysed, examining key initiatives and their reported pay‐offs to the organisation. A matrix diagram approach is introduced which presents the extent and credibility of arguments advanced for these initiatives, in seven categories of pay‐off. A system of assessment is proposed, which quantifies the extent and weight of empirical evidence and estimates the strength of the claim for each pay‐off.

Findings

The pay‐off matrix summarises the claims in each of the pay‐off categories, assesses their credibility, and displays the similarities and differences for six key initiatives: total quality management, six sigma, ISO 9000, business process reengineering, lean and business excellence. Graphical pay‐off profiles are presented. Significant differences between the claimed pay‐offs for these initiatives are identified, analysed and discussed.

Research limitations/implications

The proposed matrix and assessment system attempts to support a comprehensive and rational approach to assess the pay‐offs of QM and CI initiatives. As with any analysis of literature, there is inevitably an element of selection, but this approach consciously attempts to avoid omission and promote objectivity. The analysis is based on articles published between 1990 and 2005. Hence, new research and additional evidence may change the weight and credibility of claims.

Originality/value

This paper suggests a way in which evidence from the literature might be most effectively used by managers for decision support in the choice of quality and improvement initiatives. A similar approach might also be used for other areas, where businesses face choices and a considerable body of evidence exists to assist the decision‐making process.

Details

International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, vol. 25 no. 4
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0265-671X

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 15 February 2011

Fiona Lalor and Patrick G. Wall

The purpose of this paper is to review and compare the scientific and regulatory environments for nutrition and health claims on foodstuffs in the USA, Japan and the…

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to review and compare the scientific and regulatory environments for nutrition and health claims on foodstuffs in the USA, Japan and the European Union.

Design/methodology/approach

A review of the literature and the relevant legislation in the three different countries is conducted. Regulations are reviewed and scientific evidence requirements are outlined in each country.

Findings

Full regulatory approval for claims across all three countries requires the support of robust scientific evidence. To obtain this, companies must submit comprehensive dossiers and detailed applications to the regulators with full descriptions of the tests and studies completed during product development. However in the USA and Japan, an alternative process exists. A health claim that is suggested but not supported by scientific evidence is known as a qualified health claim and is permitted in the USA and Japan, but not in the EU.

Practical implications

The paper demonstrates the difference in regulatory requirements in different countries which leads to different claims being permitted in different countries. It also leads to different levels of scientific support for similar claims which causes consumer confusion and develops an uneven playing pitch for the industry. Given that the industry operates in a global market place, it is imperative that a consensus is reached as to the level of scientific evidence required to approve a health claim. In that way, consumers can be safeguarded from being misled, consumer confusion will not be a concern and products can be globally distributed in line with the increasing liberalisation of trade.

Originality/value

This paper is of value to regulators and the food industry.

Details

British Food Journal, vol. 113 no. 2
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0007-070X

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 19 June 2009

Lisa Weltzer‐Ward, Beate Baltes and Laura Knight Lynn

The purpose of this paper is to describe a theoretically based coding framework for an integrated analysis and assessment of critical thinking in online discussion.

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to describe a theoretically based coding framework for an integrated analysis and assessment of critical thinking in online discussion.

Design/methodology/approach

The critical thinking assessment framework (TAF) is developed through review of theory and previous research, verified by comparing results to previous research, and checked for reliability by comparing results for multiple coders.

Findings

Although process, structure, and quality of online discussions are assessed independently, a standard framework integrating these aspects for comprehensive assessment of critical thinking in online discussions is not found in literature review. The critical TAF described here offers a reliable and valid tool for integrating process, structure, and quality to assess critical thinking in online discussions.

Research/limitations/implications

The critical TAF serves as a methodological tool for assessing critical thinking in online discussion. Further research should further assess the validity and reliability of this tool and should integrate the framework with assessments for other aspects of discussion such as social or instructor presence.

Practical implications

The implementation of the critical TAF in future studies will ultimately help identify online educational activities and tools which best support development and application of critical thinking skills. Furthermore, it might be used to assess critical thinking of individual participants or small groups in a discussion.

Originality/value

The critical TAF described in this paper provides a valid and reliable tool for integrated assessment of the process, structure, and quality of critical thinking in online discussions.

Details

Campus-Wide Information Systems, vol. 26 no. 3
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1065-0741

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 27 July 2010

Melanie Feinberg

This paper aims to examine how systems for organizing information construct rhetorical arguments for a particular interpretation of their subject matter.

Abstract

Purpose

This paper aims to examine how systems for organizing information construct rhetorical arguments for a particular interpretation of their subject matter.

Design/methodology/approach

The paper synthesizes a conceptual framework from the field of rhetoric and uses that framework to analyze how existing organizational schemes present evidence in support of arguments regarding the material being organized.

Findings

Organizational schemes can present logical arguments as posed in rhetoric, using two forms of evidence for their claims: relationship evidence from the category structure and resource evidence from the ways that items are assigned to categories.

Research limitations/implications

This study does not attempt to identify all types of evidence that organizational schemes might use in argumentation. Further research may describe additional forms of evidence and argumentative structures.

Practical implications

When creating organizational schemes, designers might develop a strategy to facilitate persuasive argumentation. Moreover, because arguments may be either strengthened or undermined through the assignment of resources to categories, both indexing and collection development may be seen as contributing to the overall design of an organizational scheme.

Originality/value

While many researchers have asserted that organizational schemes form arguments, and while various studies have described what information systems might be said to communicate, this study focuses on how such communication may take place more or less effectively. This analysis foregrounds the potential for organizational schemes to be systematically and purposefully designed as rhetorical communication, to express particular ideas.

Details

Journal of Documentation, vol. 66 no. 4
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0022-0418

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 1 August 2016

Lena Nordheim, Kjell Sverre Pettersen, Signe Flottorp and Esther Hjälmhult

Critical appraisal skills are necessary to navigate the numerous contradictory and pseudo-scientific claims in the popular media. Health and science education in schools…

Abstract

Purpose

Critical appraisal skills are necessary to navigate the numerous contradictory and pseudo-scientific claims in the popular media. Health and science education in schools is essential for promoting these skills in students. The purpose of this paper is to explore lower secondary school science teachers’ perceptions and reported practices related to teaching critical appraisal of health claims.

Design/methodology/approach

Interpretive description strategy guided the study process. A purposeful sample of 25 Norwegian teachers was interviewed individually or in groups. Interviews were analysed using the constant comparative method.

Findings

One main theme, “unexploited opportunities for teaching critical appraisal”, and three sub-themes were identified: “inattentive to the relevance of critical appraisal”, “prioritise facts over critical appraisal”, “limited competency in critical appraisal”. Teachers’ descriptions of science sessions devoted to health education uncovered important opportunities for teaching critical appraisal of health claims. However, teachers did not appear to seize opportunities because they seemed inattentive to the relevance of teaching critical appraisal, they reported to prioritise teaching health content knowledge, and teachers themselves revealed limited expertise in assessing health claims critically.

Practical implications

The findings suggest that science teachers need support to take better advantage of the links between health and science education to enhance students’ critical appraisal skills.

Originality/value

This study adds depth to the understanding of issues and challenges faced by science teachers regarding critical appraisal of health claims, which is an important aspect of health education schools.

Details

Health Education, vol. 116 no. 5
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0965-4283

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Book part
Publication date: 15 November 2016

Emily Howell

To present the instructional activities of an intervention enacted in two formative experiment studies. The goal of these studies was to improve students’ argumentative…

Abstract

Purpose

To present the instructional activities of an intervention enacted in two formative experiment studies. The goal of these studies was to improve students’ argumentative writing, both conventional and digital, multimodal.

Design/methodology/approach

This chapter provides the instructional steps taken by high-school teachers as they integrated multimodal argument projects into their classroom, describing the planning and instructional activities needed to teach students both the elements of argument and the practice of digital, multimodal design.

Findings

The author discusses the practical pedagogical steps and considerations needed to have students create digital, multimodal arguments in the form of infographics and public service announcements. Students were engaged in the creation of these arguments; however, practical considerations are discussed for both task complexity and the merger between digital and conventional writing.

Practical implications

Research suggests that integrating digital tools and multimodality into classrooms may be needed and valued, but practical suggestions for this integration are lacking. This chapter provides the needed pedagogical application of digital tools and multimodality to academic instruction.

Details

Writing Instruction to Support Literacy Success
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-1-78635-525-6

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 15 June 2015

Ian Thomson, Colin Dey and Shona Russell

The purpose of this paper is to provide theoretical and empirical insights into the effective use of external accounts by social activists in conflict arenas in order to…

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to provide theoretical and empirical insights into the effective use of external accounts by social activists in conflict arenas in order to bring about change.

Design/methodology/approach

This paper presents a longitudinal case study of Action on Smoking and Health UK (ASH) and their use of external accounts and other activist practices during the period 1999-2010. The authors explore these practices from the perspective of one organisation engaged in conflict arenas concerning the (un)acceptability of tobacco production, consumption and governance. The authors conduct the exploration based upon a dynamic conflict arena framework that attends to the range of external accounting and activist practices, tactical intentions and states of conflict used by ASH to confront the tobacco industry and bring about change in tobacco governance.

Findings

The study identifies the use of a diverse range of external accounts and other activist practices. This assemblage of practices was used to confront, counter-act and to co-operate with actors engaged in tobacco-related conflicts. The evidence suggests that the deployment of different types of external accounts by ASH was aligned to the context of the particular conflict arena involved, and was influenced by the strategy and engagement tactics of the activists and other actors, as well as power dynamics and acceptability of the tobacco governance in the conflict arena. Whilst ASH used different external accounts in specific episodes of activism, these individual accounts also contributed to an emerging holistic account of the unacceptable consequences of tobacco production, consumption and governance.

Originality/value

This study provides new theoretical and empirical insights into how external accounts can contribute to the problematisation of governance and development of social and environmental change agendas. The dynamic conflict arena framework developed in this paper creates new visibilities and possibilities for developing external accounting practices and for researching this fast-developing area of social and environmental accounting.

Details

Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, vol. 28 no. 5
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0951-3574

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 4 May 2021

Ayşe Öcal, Lu Xiao and Jaihyun Park

Complex social interactions such as argumentation and persuasion are increasingly common in online communications. To better understand these interactions and their…

Abstract

Purpose

Complex social interactions such as argumentation and persuasion are increasingly common in online communications. To better understand these interactions and their impacts on people and on the society, it is important for the authors to understand how people reason online such as when they need to justify themselves or convince others with their perspectives. Reasoning in online discussions is expectedly to be different from doing so offline, as one often communicates with others anonymously and asynchronously in such contexts (e.g. Reddit discussions). The purpose of this paper is to investigate people's reasoning behavior in online environments focusing on how they justify their perspectives.

Design/methodology/approach

In this study, the authors examined how a subreddit Change My View (CMV) users offer their opinions and justify them through the lens of argumentation and reasoning. The authors annotated, 330 Reddit discussion original posts (OPs) to identify claims, rationales and supports for reasoning, i.e. personal experiences, definitions, domain expertise and external sources. The authors investigated the correlations among the occurrences of these supporting statements and whether they are related to the topics of the posts.

Findings

The findings suggest that if people mention their domain expertise, they tend to provide related personal experiences as well. Additionally, if the participants talk about the topic of domestic politics, they tend to utilize their personal experiences.

Research limitations/implications

Further research may be conducted to help system designers. System designers (e.g. online debate systems, collective decision-making systems, etc.) may benefit from the findings to design systems by considering commonly used supporting statements, which may enhance people's reasoning and argumentation processes. The sample size is a small sample. The authors acknowledge that the small sample size of the study may limit the generalizability of the findings; however, it is still acceptable compared to the existing literature. One future study could be annotating a larger dataset to further probe the use of supporting statements in online reasoning.

Practical implications

The authors' findings might be useful to understand how Reddit users are justifying their opinions as the reflection of their reasoning processes. In order to contribute further research in argumentation and reasoning in online platforms, the authors make the annotated dataset publicly available.

Originality/value

To best of the authors' knowledge, this study was one of a few studies whose purpose is to understand Reddit CMV users' reasoning processes. To understand how online users offer their reasons while providing their ideas is important to have effective communication processes and to improve online discussion experiences which are very common in today's digital era.

Peer review

The peer review history for this article is available at: https://publons.com/publon/10.1108/OIR-08-2020-0330

Details

Online Information Review, vol. ahead-of-print no. ahead-of-print
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1468-4527

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Book part
Publication date: 28 April 2021

Heather J. Forbes, Jenee Vickers Johnson and Jason C. Travers

The innovations in this volume instill a sense of optimism about how special education professionals might improve outcomes for students with disabilities. Although many…

Abstract

The innovations in this volume instill a sense of optimism about how special education professionals might improve outcomes for students with disabilities. Although many interventions illustrate scientific progress toward an evidence-based profession, many special educators may find it challenging to discriminate between scientifically validated innovation and various fads. While innovation reflects the gradual progress of science, fads usually arise suddenly and lack an evidentiary foundation. Some fads may persist over time but without supportive evidence. We present several reasons why we believe special educators adopt fad interventions during an era when scientifically validated special educational practices are readily available. We propose that fads and similar unsubstantiated practices likely will be a persistent problem for special educators. A conservative and judicious approach to adopting “the next big thing” therefore seems important to an evidence-based special education.

Details

The Next Big Thing in Learning and Behavioral Disabilities
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-1-80071-749-7

1 – 10 of over 71000