Search results

The purpose of this paper is to explore the narratives that construct the practice and regulation of ‘sexting’, the sending of sexualised images via text message, when engaged in by young people. The aim of this discussion is to better understand the extent to which those narratives recognise young people’s agency in relation to their sexuality and the role that new media plays in enabling youth to explore their sexual identity.

The methodology employed is that of discourse analysis. This approach is used to deconstruct the dominant narrative of sexting contained in the literature, a narrative that constructs it as a problem to be contained and controlled, either through the application of the criminal law or through education and guidance approaches. This paper then investigates an emerging counter narrative that gives greater emphasis to the autonomy rights of youth. A case study involving a Parliamentary Inquiry in one Australian State into sexting is also employed to further this analysis.

This paper concludes that the dominant narrative remains the strongest influence in the shaping of law and the practice of sexting, but that young people may be better served by the counter narrative that recognises their agency in ways that may empower and grant them more control over their bodies.

The paper thus provides an alternative approach to developing new law and policy with respect to the regulation of sexting by youth that should be of value to lawmakers and child and youth advocates.

The purpose of the study is to analyze the impact of the Publication Timeline, i.e. Submission to First Decision and Submission to Acceptance on Journal Metrics, i.e. Impact Factor (IF) and 5-year IF.

Data related to the IF and 5-year IF were retrieved from Clarivate Analytics’ Journal Citation Report 2020. The Publication Timeline of each journal was ascertained through their respective websites. To attain the model fit summary, an analysis of variance (ANOVA) test was performed. Regression analysis was also performed on the models using SPSS 21 software to ascertain the nature and degree of impact the Publication Timeline (Submission to First Decision and Submission to Acceptance) has on Journal Metrics (IF and 5-year IF).

Submission to First Decision has a significant inverse relationship with both the IF and 5-year IF, whereas Submission to Acceptance has a significant direct relation with 5-year IF and an inverse but insignificant relationship with IF.

Journals published by Springer Nature and of multidisciplinary nature have been considered for the study. Only those journals were selected that provided the information regarding the Publication Timeline, whereas those which did not provide the same, were excluded. However, new insights can be revealed if the journals published by different publishers and belonging to one particular discipline are studied.

The study helps to ascertain the impact of the Publication Timeline on the Impact Metrics of the journals. It can help the authors select the journals as their publishing venues considering the Publication Timeline. Publishers can also be benefitted from the findings of this study since improvisations and modifications in their Publication Timelines can positively influence the impact metrics of their respective journals.

The study attempts to measure the impact of the Publication Timeline on Journal Metrics using cross-sectional secondary data, by performing regression analysis. Though various studies have examined the influence of the Publication Timeline on the IF using correlation analysis, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first of its kind to use regression analysis to check the relation, as well as the degree of impact the Publication Timeline, has on Journal Metrics.

Firms increasingly integrate a wide range of actors in the early ideation and concept creation phases of innovation processes leading to the collection of a large number of ideas. This creates the challenge of filtering the most promising ideas from a large number of submissions. The use of external stakeholders into the evaluation and selection of submissions (i.e. open evaluation (OE)) might be a viable alternative. The purpose of this paper is to provide a state-of-the-art analysis on how such OE systems are designed and structured.

Since OE is a new phenomenon, an exploratory qualitative research approach is adopted. In all, 122 instances of OE in 90 innovation contest cases are examined for their design elements.

This research reveals that OE systems are configured in many different ways. In total, 32 design elements and their respective parameters are identified and described along the six socio-technical system components of an OE system. This study allows for a comprehensive understanding of what OE is and what factors need to be taken into consideration when designing an OE system.

Scholars and professionals may draw insights on what design choices to make when implementing OE.

The comprehensive analysis performed in this study contributes to research on open and user innovation by examining the concept of OE. In particular, it extends knowledge on design elements of OE systems.

The online crowdsourcing has been widely applied in the practice. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the all-pay auction contest in crowdsourcing, wherein a seeker posts a task online and the solvers decide whether to participate in the contest and in what extent to spend efforts on their submissions.

The authors specifically consider two classic contest formats: simultaneous contest and sequential contest, depending on whether the solver can observe the prior solvers’ submissions before making her own effort investment decision or not. They derive both seeker’s and solver’s equilibrium decisions and payoffs under different contest formats, and show that they vary significantly according to the number and the average skill level of solvers.

The results show that a solver would always invest more on her submission under simultaneous contest than under sequential contest, as she cannot confirm how other solvers’ submissions would be. This subsequently intensifies the market competition and brings down a solver’s average payoff under simultaneous contest. Although the simultaneous contest gives rise to a higher expected highest quality of all submissions, it also requires the seeker to spend more search cost to identify the best submission. Therefore, when the number of solvers is high or the average skill level is low, the seeker prefers sequential contest to simultaneous contest. The results also show an analogous preference over two formats for the platform.

This paper investigates two formats of all-pay auction contest in crowdsourcing and evaluates them from the perspective of solvers, seekers and platforms, respectively. The research offers many interesting insights which do not only explain the incentive mechanisms for solvers under different contest formats, but also make meaningful contributions to the seeker’s or the platform’s adoption strategies between two alternative contest formats in crowdsourcing practice.

This paper aimed to explore the submissions made to the National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting (NGER) policy paper by corporations and other stakeholders. It also sought to establish whether broader climate change issues were addressed in the context of the submissions.

The agenda‐setting framework was utilised to provide the theoretical perspective for the study. This research applied a combination of concept analysis and mapping, and content analysis, of the submissions using the Leximancer software tool.

The study found a divergence in the responses of corporations and other stakeholders, with the former focusing primarily on the NGER policy paper, while the latter presented significant concerns over carbon pollution and climate change, an issue that was not the primary concern of the policy paper. Moreover, corporations also acknowledged the close link between the NGER process and a future emissions trading scheme, and expressed concerns over the development of a mechanism that would put a price on carbon.

The paper contributes to the limited literature on carbon accounting and reporting in relation to both the local and international context. Moreover, an agenda‐setting perspective provided a suitable lens for understanding the NGER submissions process and its role within the broader climate change policy area in Australia.

Policies are influenced by key players and their familiarity with these policies could lead to successful implementation. The establishment of the NGER legislation was deemed successful, despite concerns raised in the submissions. This was because the policy used corporate reporting as a means of assessing accountability for carbon emissions. This finding has implications for other nations seeking to develop mandatory carbon reporting.

The paper has built further explanatory potential of the agenda‐setting framework, provides direct evidence in relation to stakeholder submissions to prospective environmental legislation, and adds to the use of combination methods that can be utilised for effectively analysing stakeholder submissions on major policy questions and issues.

Existing studies on the relationship between task description and task performance are insufficient, with many studies considering description length rather than content to measure quality or only evaluating a single aspect of task performance. To address this gap, this study analyzes the linguistic styles of task descriptions from 2,545 tasks on the Taskcn.com crowdsourcing platform.

An empirical analysis was completed for task description language styles and task performance. The paper used text mining tool Simplified Chinese Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count to extract eight linguistic styles, namely readability, self-distancing, cognitive complexity, causality, tentative language, humanizing personal details, normative information and language intensity. And it tests the relationship between the eight language styles and task performance.

The study found that more cognitive complexity markers, tentative language, humanized details and normative information increase the quantity of submissions for a task. In addition, more humanized details and normative information in a task description improves the quality of task. Conversely, the inclusion of more causal relationships in a task description reduces the quantity of submissions. Poorer readability of the task description, less self-estrangement and higher language intensity reduces the quality of the task.

This study first reveals the importance of the linguistic styles used in task descriptions and provides a reference for how to attract more task solvers and achieve higher quality task performance by improving task descriptions. The research also enriches existing knowledge on the impact of linguistic styles and the applications of text mining.

The purpose of this paper is to propose novel information visualization and interaction techniques to help security administrators analyze past web form submissions, with the goals of searching, inspecting, verifying, and understanding about malicious submissions.

The authors utilize well‐known visual design principles in the techniques to support the analysis process. They also implement a prototype and use it to investigate simulated normal and malicious web submissions.

The techniques can increase analysts' efficiency by displaying large amounts of information at a time, help analysts detect certain kinds of anomalies, and support the analyzing process via provided interaction capabilities.

Due to resources constraints, the authors experimented on simulated data only, not real data.

The techniques can be used to investigate past web form submissions, which is a first step in analysing and understanding the current security situation and attackers' skills. The knowledge gained from this process can be used to plan for effective future defence strategy, e.g. by improving/fine‐tuning the attack signatures of an automatic intrusion detection system.

The visualization and interaction designs are the first visual analysis technique for security investigation of web form submissions.

This paper aims to examine the nature of academic engagement with policy and the (lack of) responsiveness by policymakers to the scientific community through the development of the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) Foundation Trustees’ Consultation Paper on Sustainability Reporting (IFRS Foundation, 2020).

The 577 submissions to the IFRS Foundation consultation were reviewed, and 39 were identified as being submitted by academics. These 39 included collectively 104 academic signatories from 74 organisations or networks and 20 countries. They were analysed using NVivo. Drawing on the literature on techniques used to discredit or credit arguments, we examine the academic responses to the consultation questions, particularly those concerning: the role of the IFRS Foundation; perceptions of the “investor perspective”; the audience for reporting; the definition of materiality; and a climate first approach.

The majority (72%) of academic submissions were opposed to the IFRS Foundation Trustees’ proposals on key issues. This dissenting majority collectively have substantial research records in sustainability reporting and its outcomes. Those supportive were significantly less likely to reference research or state their credentials and, despite being supportive, nevertheless raised concerns with the proposals.

Senior academics undertaking research in the field have engaged, in unusually high numbers, with a policy development they believe will not work and maybe counter to achieving sustainable development. The findings underscore the importance of highlighting the discrediting strategies and tactics used in this discursive “battle”. The findings have implications for the legitimacy of policymakers on sustainability-related initiatives which are not engaging with the relevant scientific community.

Policy initiatives that are judged as potentially harmful to sustainable development attract more intense, activist and sustained engagement supported by research evidence.

The paper identifies the importance of evidence-based academic engagement and highlights strategies that engaging academics need to persist over. It highlights the collective view of academics in the field on the IFRS Foundation consultation paper.

This paper aims to determine and analyze the rate of content submission by lecturers in relation to type of university, discipline, academic qualification, rank and teaching experience and identified the determinants of research output submission by faculty members in Nigerian varsities.

The survey was conducted in six universities with functional institutional repositories in Southern Nigeria. Data collated through questionnaire from the university lecturers were analyzed using frequency distribution, percentages and regression analysis.

Results showed that submission of research output was higher for lecturers in Social Sciences than for those in the Sciences; the highest among those with doctorate degree, senior lecturers and those with 6–10 years of teaching experience. The rank of faculty members and the type of university were significant determinants of research output submission.

The survey was limited to universities in Southern Nigeria with functional institutional repositories. There should be further investigations on same study in universities with functional institutional repositories in other regions in Nigeria.

Increased submission rate by faculty members will sustain the institutional repositories.

Faculty members get in contact, make friends and engage in collaborative research.

This report contributes to the global knowledge and communication’s field through the provision of empirical evidence on the determinants of content submission in open access institutional repositories.

We demonstrate in a laboratory experiment that the effectiveness of performance-contingent incentives is inversely related to risk-aversion levels. For about 16.5% of participants, performance fails to improve under performance-pay, and the probability of such failure increases with risk-aversion. This phenomenon works in part through the reduced effort level of more risk-averse individuals when effort level is positively correlated with risk exposure. It is also associated with higher self-reported levels of stress by more risk-averse people working under performance-contingent pay. We find no evidence of such stress causing decrements in the quality of effort affecting performance after controlling for effort level. However, controlling for effort, more risk-averse participants perform better under a fixed salary, leaving less room for improvement under performance-pay.