Search results

The New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) is at the center of an increasing chorus of market professionals who complain that investors are at the mercy of a system that caters to exchange specialists. While structural change may be necessary to address the NYSE’s governance issues, talk about wholesale structural change in the trading of NYSE‐listed securities is misguided. As this paper discusses, the real issue is the lack of competition among the marketplaces that trade NYSE‐listed shares. The article is intended to contribute to the market structure debate by exploring the market structure of the NYSE, the competitive environment for exchange‐listed securities, the limitations associated with the current structure, and what changes might be pursued. In particular, the author calls attention to the “trade‐through” rule, implemented through the Intermarket Trading System (ITS), which benefits the NYSE by discouraging orders from being routed to alternative marketplaces

The purpose of this paper is to explore the acts that constitute cyber‐bullying and to see how from a lay concept these acts are classified.

Data were gathered using two groups of participants (two Australian participants and three British participants may posit different cultural views). The first set of data was generated through cyber‐bullying element extraction from cyber‐bullying literature and interviews were conducted with five college students (three from the United Kingdom and two from Australia). The second set was generated through open ended demonstration of internet negative acts such as sending unwanted messages, rude images, threats and malicious messages in a scenario classification questionnaire. This involved the recruitment of 114 first year undergraduate psychology students in the United Kingdom. The scenario questionnaire measured participants' categorisation of internet negative acts from a lay perspective. Participants' perceptions of cyber‐bullying were examined through grounded theory and thematic narratives to see how these findings differ from literature in the cyber‐bullying arena.

Emerging theory indicates the need to treat cyber‐bullying as a standalone entity without the confounding role that the more traditional concept of bullying plays in cyber bullying definitions. Additionally, internet negative acts, irrespective of their terminological classifications, were perceived as immoral and anti‐social. Suggestions were made to aid practitioners' to implement interventions against cyber‐bullying.

Participant numbers at stage one were limited. Thus, it is suggested future replication(s) of this study employ(s) a larger number of participants so as to ascertain the generalisability of findings. It is also suggested that potential future studies should employ quantitative analyses to further triangulate the findings of the current study.

The strength of the present study lies in its rich qualitative triangulation, as well as its focus on exploring elements that constitute cyber‐bullying from a lay perspective.

The purpose of this paper is to examine whether negative emotions mediate the relationship between supervisor rudeness and subordinates' retaliatory reactions and how the reactions to supervisor rudeness differ between US Americans and Koreans and between in‐group and out‐group supervisors.

A survey involving 197 employees from USA and South Korea. MANCOVA was used to analyze the data.

Employees who were rudely (rather than politely) treated when receiving explanations for organizational decisions were more likely to engage in retaliation. The latter tendency was partially mediated by the negative emotions that the employees felt about their rude treatment. In addition, the rudeness‐retaliation effects became stronger when the supervisor was dissimilar (rather than similar) to them, and the latter two‐way interaction effect was even stronger to those who highly value vertical collectivism. Surprisingly, however, Koreans were more likely to retaliate against their supervisor rather than US Americans.

Previous scenario‐based studies contrasting Koreans and US Americans have yielded findings suggesting that Koreans and US American employees may differ in their responses to supervisory rudeness. Additionally, the tendency of people to be more attracted to similar rather than dissimilar others (consistent with the similarity‐attraction paradigm) suggests that the (dis)similarity of a supervisor is likely to influence the rudeness‐retaliation effect. Future research needs to examine when, how, and why employees retaliate against supervisory rudeness to better understand the retaliation dynamics in organizations.

This is the only study that has examined how, in the context of receiving rude treatment from a supervisor, retaliatory reactions by US American versus Korean employees may differ and why (i.e. via emotional mediating variables), and whether US American‐Korean differences in retaliation under these circumstances are influenced by the supervisor's perceived (dis)similarity.

Workplace incivility has been identified as a specific form of social mistreatment causing distress despite its low intensity. Research on workplace incivility has touched on a variety of personal and contextual factors associated with incivility’s prevalence including research on both antecedents and outcomes. The research has been especially concerned with identifying a wide range of negative consequences of incivility, including various occupational, interpersonal, and health-related implications. Theoretical explorations have considered links of incivility to sexism and racism, and its reflection of attachment styles, as well as its inherent connection with the stressor-emotion model of counterproductive work behavior (Spector & Fox, 2005). The power of incivility to elicit distress has been attributed to its capacity to signal riskiness of social situations that thwart core social motives (i.e., self-control). Intervention research has been relatively rare, but progress is evident.

Presents the scientific methodology from the enlarged cybernetical perspective that recognizes the anisotropy of time, the probabilistic character of natural laws, and the entry that the incomplete determinism in Nature opens to the occurrence of innovation, growth, organization, teleology communication, control, contest and freedom. The new tier to the methodological edifice that cybernetics provides stands on the earlier tiers, which go back to the Ionians (c. 500 BC). However, the new insights reveal flaws in the earlier tiers, and their removal strengthens the entire edifice. The new concepts of teleological activity and contest allow the clear demarcation of the military sciences as those whose subject matter is teleological activity involving contest. The paramount question “what ought to be done”, outside the empirical realm, is embraced by the scientific methodology. It also embraces the cognitive sciences that ask how the human mind is able to discover, and how the sequence of discoveries might converge to a true description of reality.