Search results

To elaborate the nature of fact-checking in the domain of political information by examining how fact-checkers assess the validity of claims concerning the Russo-Ukrainian conflict and how they support their assessments by drawing on evidence acquired from diverse sources of information.

Descriptive quantitative and qualitative content analysis of 128 reports written by the fact-checkers of Snopes – an established fact-checking organisation – during the period of 24 February 2022 – 28 June, 2023. For the analysis, nine evaluation grounds were identified, most of them inductively from the empirical material. It was examined how the fact-checkers employed such grounds while assessing the validity of claims and how the assessments were bolstered by evidence acquired from information sources such as newspapers.

Of the 128 reports, the share of assessments indicative of the invalidity of the claims was 54.7%, while the share of positive ratings was 26.7%. The share of mixed assessments was 15.6%. In the fact-checking, two evaluation grounds, that is, the correctness of information and verifiability of an event presented in a claim formed the basis for the assessment. Depending on the topic of the claim, grounds such as temporal and spatial compatibility, as well as comparison by similarity and difference occupied a central role. Most popular sources of information offering evidence for the assessments include statements of government representatives, videos and photographs shared in social media, newspapers and television programmes.

As the study concentrated on fact-checking dealing with political information about a specific issue, the findings cannot be extended to concern the fact-checking practices in other contexts.

The study is among the first to characterise how fact-checkers employ evaluation grounds of diverse kind while assessing the validity of political information.

In general, all differences between the Employer and the Contractor are firstly addressed by the Engineer, usually under Sub-Clause 3.7 [Agreement or Determination]; if the Parties have confidence in the Engineer’s capability to act fairly, many differences will be finally settled under the Sub-Clause 3.7 procedure. However, if either of the Parties is dissatisfied with a determination by the Engineer, a Notice of Dissatisfaction (a NOD, see Sub-Clause 1.1.57) can be filed; thereafter, either Party may proceed in accordance with Sub-Clause 21.4 [Obtaining DAAB’s Decision], see Sub-Clause 3.7.5 [Dissatisfaction with Engineer’s determination]. The dispute resolution procedure under the 2017 edition is outlined in Figure 20B. The first two Sub-Clauses of Clause 21 [Disputes and Arbitration] deal with the formation of the Dispute Avoidance/Adjudication Board (Sub-Clause 21.1 [Constitution of the DAAB]), including how to move forward with the DAAB if either of the Parties fail to appoint a member of the DAAB (Sub-Clause 21.2 [Failure to Appoint DAAB Member(s)]). Sub-Clause 21.3 [Avoidance of Disputes] describes the DAAB’s role in avoiding the escalation of any issues or disagreements into Disputes. Sub-Clause 21.4 [Obtaining DAAB’s Decision] outlines the procedure before the DAAB in respect of the resolution of Disputes. Sub-Clause 21.5 [Amicable Settlement] includes an invitation for the Parties to resolve disagreements about a decision from the DAAB amicably, while Sub-Clause 21.6 [Arbitration] provides the ultimate procedure for resolution of Disputes, arbitration. Sub-Clause 21.7 [Failure to Comply with DAAB’s Decision] entitles either Party to refer the failure of the other Party to comply with a decision from the DAAB. Finally, Sub-Clause 21.8 [No DAAB In Place] outlines the procedure to follow if no DAAB is in place when a Dispute arises (the Dispute may be referred directly to arbitration).

The aim of this paper is to propose a basis upon which accounting reporting can be developed to reflect real values and the real economy. It aims to address the environmental considerations discussed in the UN debate (Bebbington and Unerman, 2020) and the concern for a “better life-world”, which is the theme of this special issue.

Addressing the task involves the application of the philosophy of pragmatic constructivism (which explains how people can relate to their reality in ways that lead to successful action) and the philosophical concept of the “good life” (which establishes the values to be pursued through action and so defines action success). Also, it outlines the necessary characteristics of measurement frameworks if they are to be effective in the development and control of human practices to achieve desired values.

This paper proposes a conceptual framework for guiding the measurement of how a sustainable good life has improved and/or deteriorated as a result of organisational activities. It outlines a system of concepts on basic and instrumental values for analysing the condition of maintaining a sustainable good life in real terms. This is related to the financial results and societal regulations to analyse and adjust controls according to the real economic goals. Also, it provides a system of value measurands to produce valid information about the development of a sustainable good life. The measurand makes accounting reporting reflect the conditions of the good life that constitute the real economy instead of merely the financial economy driven by shareholder capitalism. Providing tools to analyse whether the existing practices of business and social regulations promote or counteract the real economic goals of producing a sustainable good life means the measurement system proposed makes the invisible hand of the market visible.

The mechanism proposed to enable accounting reporting to reflect real values and the real economy is a new conceptual framework that will allow accounting to more fully realise its potential to contribute to a “better world”. In aiming to serve a sustainable good life, accounting reporting will inherently foster ethical social practices.

Underpinning social identity theory (SIT) and service-dominant logic (SDL), the current paper seeks to explore the effect of self-presentation on online brand advocacy (OBA). Furthermore, this paper investigates the mediating role of hedonic value and the moderating role of customer interaction with e-commerce websites (i.e. Amazon, Walmart and eBay).

Data were collected from customers of three e-commerce platforms (i.e. Walmart, Amazon and eBay) using a structured questionnaire – multi-group analysis applied on SmartPLS 4.4.

Self-presentation has a positive role in increasing hedonic value and its impact on OBA. The moderating effect of customer interaction on these relationships is also investigated and found to be significant.

Our findings underscore the significance of fostering inclusive online communities and favorable online settings. Existing findings are consistent with overarching objectives of digital empowerment and enhanced online interaction quality. This paper contributes to harmonious and collaborative digital societies by encouraging personalized experiences that foster a sense of belonging among diverse customers.

This paper adds to the existing body of knowledge by comparing customer behavior on three major e-commerce platforms, going beyond the traditional focus on a single platform. Drawing on SIT and SDL, this paper provides a distinct nomological framework for OBA that unifies disparate constructs, filling theoretical gaps in our understanding of online customer behavior.

The entrepreneurial process often cannot be explained by a single entrepreneurial theory. Instead, it is more likely the result of the interaction between various entrepreneurial behavior patterns and different environmental conditions. However, existing research has frequently overlooked the complexity inherent in the entrepreneurial phenomenon. Building on a configurational perspective, this study aims to examine how new ventures can use different behavioral configurations to achieve high performance amid various uncertain environments.

Based on the survey data from 143 new start-ups in China’s software industry, this study uses fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA).

This study jointly considers multiple entrepreneurial behaviors − causation, effectuation and entrepreneurial bricolage and different types of environmental uncertainty − state uncertainty, effect uncertainty and response uncertainty. The findings reveal three behavioral configurations for high/nonhigh new venture performance.

This study expands previous insights into the relationship between entrepreneurial behaviors and new venture performance from the perspective of configurational theory. Moreover, it offers new insights into the types of uncertainty, further refining our understanding of the uncertainties inherent in entrepreneurial activities.

Charles Sanders Peirce (1839–1914), recognized as the father of philosophical pragmatism, has been described as a philosopher’s philosopher. Eliyahu Moshe Goldratt (1947–2011), considered the father of the management philosophy theory of constraints (TOC), has been described as being, first and foremost, a philosopher. The TOC body of knowledge is mainly preserved as concrete methodologies used in the management discipline. By examining the foundational elements of synechism and the TOC, the purpose of this study is to investigate the intellectual connections between the arguments and legacies of Goldratt and Peirce. Although this connection is worthy of much further investigation, the research emphasizes the possible implications from a management philosophy perspective.

Based on a “review with an attitude,” the authors first examined the foundations of Goldratt’s TOC through the lens of Peirce’s synechism. Next, the authors then examined how the study of Peirce combined with a selection of contemporary research in the management and organizational studies domain could point out a direction toward completing Goldratt’s unfinished intellectual work to establish a unified science management while addressing some of the current gaps in the TOC body of knowledge.

Major findings show that synechism’s growth may extend TOC knowledge, improving managerial practice in organizations. Findings on the convergent ideas of both also reveal that Goldratt valued all synechism categories, emphasizing the importance of not overlooking Firstness. Furthermore, the study analyzes the abductive inference demonstrated in the two use cases, introducing an additional metaphor to the management of organizational systems inspired by Peirce’s philosophical concepts. The research concludes that incorporating TOC and synechism principles can enhance management and organizational practices and enrich management philosophy and theories.

This pioneering research opens promising opportunities to draw parallels between Peirce and Goldratt. Interdisciplinary collaboration will enhance the rigor and validity of integrating synechism and TOC. Experts in organizational behavior, systems theory and complexity science can provide valuable insights into this debate, while practitioners and consultants could help identify barriers and opportunities for integrating synechistic principles.

The study proposes a novel abductive approach using Peirce’s cable metaphor as an initial framework to build a unified science of management based on evolutionary stages: TOC, common sense and connectedness.

This research reinforces the argument that contemporary management practices need philosophical thinking. The authors argue that re-evaluating the foundations of management thought enriches the decision-making process in organizations and the understanding of contemporary theories in management and organizational studies.

In recent times, stakeholders have called on corporate organizations especially those charged with governance to embrace full disclosure on non-financial issues, especially sustainability reporting. Based on this premise, this study aims to examine the influence of corporate board and assurance on sustainability reporting practices (SRP) of selected 80 firms from 8 countries in sub-Saharan Africa.

To measure the corporate board, the authors use both board variables and audit committee variables. Also, the authors adapted the sustainability score model as used by previous authors in the field of sustainability disclosure to measure SRPs. The analysis was done using both ordered logistic regression and probit regression models.

The results show that the combination of board corporate and assurance has a positive and significant impact on the sustainability reporting practice of selected firms in sub-Saharan Africa.

The study places emphasis on the need for strong collaboration between the corporate board and external assurance in evaluating and enhancing the quality of sustainability disclosure.

The study bridged the gap in the literature in the area of corporate board, assurance and SRP of corporate firms which has received little attention within sub-Saharan Africa.