Search results

The purpose of this study is to investigate the dynamic return volatility connectedness among S&P, Dow Jones (DJ) sustainability indices and their conventional counterparts.

This study uses time-series daily data for 10 S&P and DJ indices over the period of December 1, 2012 to December 8, 2021. The authors divide the data into three periods; over the whole sample, pre and during the Covid-19 pandemic. The study adopts the connectedness approach developed by Diebold and Yilmaz (2014).

The results reveal a high degree of connectedness between S&P and DJ indices and their relative sustainability indices over the whole sample, pre and during the Covid-19 pandemic, indicating that the sustainability indices converge toward their conventional peers. The results further show that the conventional S&P500, S&P Euro 50 and DJWI are the main transmitters of shocks, whereas the S&P400, S&P500 and S&P50 sustainability indices are the main receivers of shocks.

The study provides novel insights in terms of shock transmission of S&P and DJ sustainability indices and their conventional counterparts, where there is a lack of investigation of the connectedness between indices in this field.

The study has significant implications for investors and portfolio managers to devise portfolio strategies to minimize risk and trace the cause, the direction and the magnitude of risk transmission among different indices. Also, the results help policymakers to manage diverse types of risks associated with S&P and DJ indices. Finally, faith-based and ethical investors would be able to predict the pairwise spillover connectedness between these indices.

Educated elites are making their mark on the stratification structure of the metropolitan US. Educated elites are proportionally greater whenever the economy is service dominated, and furthermore, these elites are the key factor in explaining why disparities resulting from high earners are present in service dominated areas. The resulting inequality in earnings is one of the unanticipated consequences of the growth of an educated elite, at least among males. It remains to be seen whether female elites will resemble males in their influence on inequality if sex differences in earnings disappear. The elite is a professional cadre rather than an aristocracy based solely on inherited wealth, placed just beyond an upper middle class. Given their background, education, affluence and numbers, the choices this elite makes on issues will influence the course of society.

Retailers realize that customer churn detection is a critical success factor. However, no research study has taken into consideration that misclassifying a customer as a non-churner (i.e. predicting that (s)he will not leave the company, while in reality (s)he does) results in higher costs than predicting that a staying customer will churn. The aim of this paper is to examine the prediction performance of various cost-sensitive methodologies (direct minimum expected cost (DMECC), metacost, thresholding and weighting) that incorporate these different costs of misclassifying customers in predicting churn.

Cost-sensitive methodologies are benchmarked on six real-life churn datasets from the retail industry.

This article argues that total misclassification cost, as a churn prediction evaluation measure, is crucial as input for optimizing consumer decision making. The practical classification threshold of 0.5 for churn probabilities (i.e. when the churn probability is greater than 0.5, the customer is predicted as a churner, and otherwise as a non-churner) offers the worst performance. The provided managerial guidelines suggest when to use each cost-sensitive method, depending on churn levels and the cost level discrepancy between misclassifying churners versus non-churners.

This research emphasizes the importance of cost-sensitive learning to improve customer retention management in the retail context.

This article is the first to use the concept of misclassification costs in a churn prediction setting, and to offer recommendations about the circumstances in which marketing managers should use specific cost-sensitive methodologies.

Although first rank symptoms focus on positive symptoms of psychosis they are shared by a number of psychiatric conditions. The difficulty in differentiating bipolar disorder from schizophrenia with affective features has led to a third category of patients often loosely labeled as schizoaffective. Research in schizophrenia has attempted to render the presence or absence of negative symptoms and their relation to etiology and prognosis more explicit. A dichotomous population is a recurring theme in experimental paradigms. Thus, schizophrenia is defined as process or reactive, deficit or non-deficit and by the presence or absence of affective symptoms. Laboratory tests confirm the clinical impression showing conflicting responses to dexamethasone suppression and clearly defined differences in autonomic responsiveness, but their patho-physiological significance eludes mainstream theory. Added to this is the difficulty in agreeing to what exactly constitutes useful clinical features differentiating, for example, negative symptoms of a true deficit syndrome from features of depression. Two recent papers proposed that the general and specific cognitive features of schizophrenia and major depression result from a monoamine-cholinergic imbalance, the former due to a relative muscarinic receptor hypofunction and the latter, in contrast, to a muscarinic hypersensitivity exacerbated by monoamine depletion. Further development of these ideas will provide pharmacological principles for what is currently an incomplete and largely, descriptive nosology of psychosis. It will propose a dimensional view of affective and negative symptoms based on relative muscarinic integrity and is supported by several exciting intracellular signaling and gene expression studies. Bipolar disorder manifests both muscarinic and dopaminergic hypersensitivity. The greater the imbalance between these two receptor signaling systems, the more the clinical picture will resemble schizophrenia with bizarre, incongruent delusions and increasingly disorganized thought. The capacity for affective expression, by definition a non-deficit syndrome, will remain contingent on the degree of preservation of muscarinic signaling, which itself may be unstable and vary between trait and state examinations. At the extreme end of muscarinic impairment, a deficit schizophrenia subpopulation is proposed with a primary and fixed muscarinic receptor hypofunction.

The genomic profile of bipolar disorder and schizophrenia overlap and both have a common dopaminergic intracellular signaling which is hypersensitive to various stressors. It is proposed that the concomitant muscarinic receptor upregulation differentiates the syndromes, being marked in bipolar disorder and rather less so in schizophrenia. From a behavioral point of view non-deficit syndromes and bipolar disorder appear most proximate and could be reclassified as a spectrum of affective psychosis or schizoaffective disorders. Because of a profound malfunction of the muscarinic receptor, the deficit subgroup cannot express a comparable stress response. None -theless, a convergent principle of psychotic features across psychiatric disorders is a relative monoaminergic-muscarinic imbalance in signal transduction.

Given the link between quality relationships and supportive behaviours among organisations and publics, it is not surprising that public relations scholars and practitioners have turned their attention to trying to measure public relationships and understanding their value for organisations and publics. As part of the development of a diagnostic tool for measuring relationships, the present study attempted to test a measurement scale for the organisation‐public relationship. This research effort was designed to test empirically Hon and Grunig’s proposed organisation‐public relationship instrument. Although each of the two data sets displayed slightly different operationalised items, the two groups of subjects similarly perceived the six‐factor (trust, satisfaction, control mutuality, commitment, exchange relationship, communal relationship) measures as a valid and reliable instrument for measuring their relationship with the university.

The purpose of this paper is to describe, illustrate and provide a deeper understanding of team composition and labor allocation in audit teams by quantifying the exact value of resources at different levels of the audit production. Audit teams have been considered as a black box in audit research. Therefore, this paper reports descriptive statistics on (levels and proportions of) hours and costs allocated to auditor ranks (and the number and value, i.e. billing rates, of auditors for different ranks and the entire team) to shed new light on audit teams.

This study uses a proprietary data set containing disaggregated information on hours, costs and billing rates for each team member in each of 908 audit engagements. The data are provided by a Swedish Big 4 audit firm. The study uses a purely descriptive approach and categorizes auditors into seven ranks. As size and the publicly listed status are crucial determinants of audit production, the paper splits engagements in public and private companies and reports statistics for size quartiles of both public and private clients.

The paper provides descriptive statistics for (1) client size, (2) audit team members, (3) audit hours, (4) audit costs, (5) proportion of audit hours, (6) proportion of audit costs, (7) billing rates and (8) variation of billing rates. Results show that compared to private clients, the audit firm allocates higher effort from auditors in higher ranks and lower effort from auditors in lower ranks to public clients. Another finding is that allocation varies with client size for private clients, but less so for public clients.

In an area with sparse literature, this descriptive study serves as a first step to improve our understanding and guide future research. It provides concrete support for previously known theory.

Selects one of Hamaker′s procedures for deriving a “σ” method (i.e. known process standard deviation) double sampling plan and exploits some of its properties to develop a system of “s” method (i.e. unknown process standard deviation) double sampling plans by variables that match the system of single specification limit “s” method single sampling plans of the current edition of the international standard on sampling by variables. ISO 3951: 1989. The new system is presented in two forms, the second of which may also be used for combined double specification limits and multivariate acceptance sampling.

The purpose of this paper is to study public project governance frameworks in various ministries and agencies in Norway, following the introduction of such a framework on the topmost level (i.e. the cabinet) which applies to the very largest projects.

The study is methodologically designed as a qualitative assessment of project governance frameworks that apply to state-funded investment projects in selected sectors, based on data gathered through document reviews and interviews.

The study finds that all of the agencies have introduced their own project governance frameworks, which are basically consistent with the recommendations from the project management literature and with the cabinet’s overall requirements in Norway. By contrast, only one ministry has taken a formalized role as a project owner. Governance tasks thus seem to be extensively delegated to the subordinate agencies. This even includes strategic tasks such as project selection and portfolio management, and implies there is a risk that public project governance has a narrow and internal focus.

The paper is a first step toward a better understanding of public project governance as a hierarchical system and the relationship between project owners on three levels, the cabinet, the sectoral ministry, and the government agency.

The purpose of this paper is to examine people’s understanding and evaluation of uncertainty intervals produced by experts as part of a quality assurance procedure of large public projects.

Three samples of educated participants (employees in a large construction company, students attending courses in project management and judgment and decision making, and judges of district and appeal courts) answered questionnaires about cost estimates of a highway construction project, presented as a probability distribution.

The studies demonstrated additivity neglect of probabilities that are graphically displayed. People’s evaluations of the accuracy of interval estimates revealed a boundary (a “cliff”) effect, with a sharp drop in accuracy ratings for outcomes above an arbitrary maximum. Several common verbal phrases (what “can” happen, is “entirely possible” and “not surprising”) which might seem to indicate expected outcomes were regularly used to describe unlikely values near or at the top of the distribution (an extremity effect).

All judgments concerned a single case and were made by participants who were not stakeholders in this specific project. Further studies should compare judgments aided by a graph with conditions where the graph is changed or absent.

Experts and project managers cannot assume that readers of cost estimates understand a well-defined uncertainty interval as intended. They should also be aware of effects created by describing uncertain estimates in words.

The studies show how inconsistencies in judgment affect the understanding and evaluation of uncertainty intervals by well-informed and educated samples tested in a maximally transparent situation. Readers of cost estimates seem to believe that precise estimates are feasible and yet that costs are usually underestimated.