Search results

Building on work that explores the relationship between individual beliefs and ability to recognize discrimination (e.g., Kaiser and Major, 2006), we examine how an adherence to beliefs about gender essentialism, gender egalitarianism, and meritocracy shape one’s interpretation of an illegal act of sexual harassment involving a male supervisor and female subordinate. We also consider whether the role of the gendered culture of engineering (Faulkner, 2009) matters for this relationship. Specifically, we conducted an online survey-experiment asking individuals to report their beliefs about gender and meritocracy and subsequently to evaluate a fictitious but illegal act of sexual harassment in one of two university research settings: an engineering department, a male-dominated setting whose culture is documented as being unwelcoming to women (Hatmaker, 2013; Seron, Silbey, Cech, and Rubineau, 2018), and an ambiguous research setting. We find evidence that the stronger one’s adherence to gender egalitarian beliefs, the greater one’s ability to detect inappropriate behavior and sexual harassment while gender essentialist beliefs play no role in their detection. The stronger one’s adherence to merit beliefs, the less likely they are to view an illegal interaction as either inappropriate or as sexual harassment. We account for respondent knowledge of sexual harassment and their socio-demographic characteristics, finding that the former is more often associated with the detection of inappropriate behavior and sexual harassment at work. We close with a discussion of the transferability of results and policy implications of our findings.

The author extends the work on diversity policy in UK higher education by centring the voices of Black and minority ethnic scholars and de-centring white comfort with the aim of a call to stop the pain that sanitised university diversity policies cause Black and minority ethnic scholars.

Using in-depth qualitative and auto-ethographic research methods, this paper engages with both respondents' narratives as well as the author's experience of carrying out the research within the walls of predominately white universities.

In order for universities to move beyond hollow and sanitised diversity, they must centre the voices of Black and minority ethnic scholars. Respondents spoke of their experiences of pain, and feelings of “taking up” space in predominately white universities. The author also discusses respondents' feelings towards diversity and inclusion policies such as the Race Equality Charter Mark.

The research is built on previous work on diversity by decentring white comfort.

South Africa’s wool industry plays an important role in the agricultural sector. The wool industry provides a valuable source of income for farmers who practice sustainable farming practices. However, wool farmers face numerous challenges, such as wool contamination, dirty wool and producing good-quality wool. Good-quality wool is determined by fibre diameter, clean yield, vegetable matter and staple length. This study aims to address these challenges.

A multiple regression analysis of price (R/kg) of White wool and Merino wool was applied to four variables fibre diameter: vegetable matter, clean yield and staple length. The analysis was based on the data for the 2009–2019 data from Cape Wools auctions.

Fibre diameter, clean yield and staple length, with exception of vegetable matter, made a statistically significant contribution to the determination of wool price after all other independent variables were controlled for (p < 0.05). A one-unit (micron) increase in fibre diameter resulted in a 0.404-unit decrease in wool price (R/kg). A one-unit (mm) increase in staple length resulted in a 0.022-unit increase in wool price (R/kg). There was no statistically significant association between vegetable matter and wool price. A one-unit increase in clean yield was associated with a 0.111-unit increase in wool price (R/kg).

Since wool fleeces consist of the largest portion of wool shorn from sheep, it is important for wool farmers to focus on wool with low fibre diameter, high clean yield percentage, low percentage of vegetable matter content and good length of the wool.

Since wool fleeces consist of the largest portion of wool shorn from sheep, it is important for wool farmers to focus on wool with low fibre diameter, high clean yield percentage, low percentage of vegetable matter content and good length of the wool.

In a developing country such as South Africa, this study is important for the following reason. It is understanding the wool characteristics that have the most significance influence on the determination of wool price for Merino wool and White wool might effectively help the wool farmers to adapt their production systems to improve the wool characteristics that determine wool price.

This study identified a need for a study to be conducted on all wool classes.

In Virginia, former Gov. L. Douglas Wilder accused the state’s library agency of racism for “its slow pace in processing and publicly presenting records from his tenure as the nation’s first elected Black governor” (Associated Press, 2020). The State Librarian responded that this was just a lapse in protocols and framed it as a budget issue and staff turnover. However, “Library of Virginia has been processing papers from his gubernatorial successors before finishing work on his” (Associated Press, 2020). Recently, the Alabama State Department of Archives and History acknowledged their participation in systemic racism, epistemicide, and their history of privileging White voices over those of Alabama African-Americans.

Epistemicide is the killing, silencing, annihilation, or devaluing of a way of knowing (Patin, Sebastian, Yeon, & Bertolini, 2020). Conceptualization and analytic application of epistemicide has an established tradition in a number of social science fields, but information scientists have only recently acknowledged epistemicide (Oliphant, 2021; Patin et al., 2020; Patin, Sebastian, Yeon, Bertolini, & Grimm, 2021). Building from our recent identification of the existence of epistemicide within the IS field (Patin et al., 2020), this work challenges the information field to become an epistemologically just space working to correct the systemic silencing of certain ways of knowing.

This chapter examines the four types of epistemic injustices—testimonial, hermeneutical, participatory, and curricular—occurring within libraries and archives and argues for a path forward to address these injustices within our programs, services, and curricula. It looks to digital humanities and to reevaluations of professional standards and LIS education to stop epistemicide and its harms. This chapter demonstrates how to affirm the power and experience of Black lives and highlight their experiences through the careful acquisition, collection, documentation, and publishing of relevant historical materials. Addressing epistemicide is critical for information professionals because we task ourselves with handling knowledge from every field. There has to be a reckoning before the paradigm can truly shift; if there is no acknowledgment of injustice, there is no room for justice.