Search results

Given resource constraints such as time and staffing, hotels cannot respond to all negative online reviews (NORs). Therefore, this study investigates (1) what types of NORs hotels should prioritize responding; and (2) what response strategies are more effective in handling different types of NORs to minimize the negative ramifications.

Four experiments in the context of hospitability were used to test the hypotheses.

Our findings show that NORs with implicit conclusions (e.g. “I do not believe that is a good choice, you know what I mean.”) are more dissuasive than NORs with explicit ones (e.g. “Do not buy it.”) because the former NORs are perceived as more objective than the latter NORs. More importantly, our results show that firms do not need to respond to explicit NORs. When responding to implicit NORs, firms should prioritize those related to service failures caused by external (e.g. weather, technological misfunction) rather than internal (e.g. poor management, employee skills) factors.

Our studies focus on the language styles of Chinese NORs, and future research should investigate how language styles influence dissuasion in other languages.

Our results show that NORs with implicit conclusions negatively impact consumer attitude and thus hurt performance more significantly than those with explicit conclusions. Therefore, firms should allocate limited staffing and resources to NORs with implicit conclusions. When responding to implicit NORs, firms should select NORs that can be attributed to external factors.

Our findings shed light on the importance of the language styles of NORs and provide marketers with insights into how to handle NORs. Our results reveal that consumers perceive higher objectivity of NORs when these reviews are implicit than when they are explicit. Furthermore, this study contributes to the online review literature by suggesting that firms should tailor their response strategies for NORs based on the reviewers’ language styles.

Previous research suggests that firms should articulate incongruent sponsorships to provide a rationale for the relationship between sponsor and sponsorship object. Fit articulation is a strategy that communicates shared associations between sponsor and object. Based on conclusion explicitness theory, this paper aims to conceptualize and tests two fit articulation strategies in sponsorships: open-ended and closed-ended.

Research hypotheses were tested in two experiments.

Only open-ended fit articulation improved brand attitudes. Mediation analyses show that while open-ended articulation influenced brand attitudes through brand image (Study 1 and Study 2) and altruistic motive attributions (Study 2), there was an indirect effect of closed-ended articulation on brand attitudes through global fit perceptions (Study 2).

The results from two experiments suggest that incongruent sponsors should use open-ended conclusions about a shared image dimension. Although explicit arguments may increase global perceptions of fit, they may impede a positive impact on the articulated brand image dimension and generation of altruistic motive attribution. Therefore, sponsorship managers should be careful in terms of using explicit arguments for fit when the sponsorship is incongruent because such arguments may hinder articulation from generating goodwill and a positive brand image.

This is the first paper to develop and test different types of fit articulation strategies in sponsorships.

To describe the 5th May 2006 ECOFIN conclusions on supervisory convergence and explain why they represent a new departure for European financial services work.

The article outlines the 6th 2006 ECOFIN conclusions relating to supervisory convergence. It then reviews EU developments relating to supervisory convergence from the 2001 Lamfalussy Process onwards as context for the conclusions. Finally, in the light of the review and the description of the conclusions it draws some conclusions about the likely implications for further developments in the EU in relation to EU supervisory convergence.

The principal findings are that supervisory convergence is likely to increase due to enhanced political backing with member state finance ministries and regulators taking a leading role.

As this is the first paper on the ECOFIN conclusions there is considerable scope for ongoing research to establish the extent to which the predictions in the paper prove to be justified by future developments.

The ECOFIN conclusions represent a departure from EU financial services work focused on a legislative programme, the Financial Services Action Plan, to a programme focusing on improving cross‐border relationships between supervisors. This has important implications for the key European actors and gives a strong role to national finance ministries and supervisors. The practical implications will be enhanced cooperation between national supervisors on a cross‐border basis. The paper argues for strong financial services industry involvement in this.

The value of the paper is twofold – Its primary value is as the first academic analysis of the ECOFIN conclusions and as a predictor of their likely influence on EU institutional balance in the financial services area. Secondly it is a useful review of the main developments with regard to EU supervisory convergence over the five years 2001‐2006 – something which, to be the best of my knowledge, has not previously been carried out in the academic literature.

The problem this essay addresses is the IS‐OUGHT problem as it is related to science, economics and ethics. The problem is especially provocative in ethics, for though ethics would seem to concern the OUGHT most directly, not a few thinkers have despaired of ever finding a way to ground ethics in an IS of some sort. Parallel to this is the dual challenge confronting economics: to ground economics is the IS, in reality, and at the same time warrant and ground economically prescriptive statements, that is, to justify OUGHT statements in economics.

This paper aims to elucidate the responsiveness of China’s judicial system in addressing the challenges of identifying online illegal fund-raising crimes that have emerged in recent years. This study systematically evaluates the efficacy and potential pitfalls of legal guidelines contained in judicial interpretations, such as holistic determination, sampling verification and presumption of the nature of funds. In addition, the research endeavors to propose pertinent recommendations for refining the existing judicial rules.

This research mainly uses a doctrinal methodology, focusing on the principal judicial interpretations formulated by the Supreme People’s Court and other central judicial entities in China. The scope encompasses the realm of online illegal fund-raising crimes as well as other cybercrimes. The analytical framework involves a comprehensive examination of these authoritative judicial documents, coupled with a theoretical and critical analysis of relevant academic materials.

This research underscores that while judicial interpretations serve as an effective legal strategy to confront the challenges posed by online illegal fund-raising crimes, their implementation introduces a nuanced landscape. These legal guidelines, often emanating from diverse judicial departments and tackling specific issues, carry the inherent risk of giving rise to new complexities and fostering inconsistency. Judicial authorities shall exercise prudence in both the formulation and application of these guidelines, ensuring their harmonization with existing legal norms and fundamental legal principles.

This research constitutes a critical and comprehensive examination of judicial interpretations in China pertaining to online illegal fund-raising crimes. It offers valuable insights into the country’s judicial interpretation system and its legal responses to financial crimes. The paper serves as a valuable resource for academics, law enforcement professionals, policymakers, legislators and researchers.

The purpose of this conceptual chapter is to analyze the current state of the astructural bias in symbolic interactionism as it relates to three inter-related processes over time: (1) the formalization of critiques of symbolic interactionism as ahistorical, astructural, and acritical perspectives; (2) an ahistorical understanding of early expressions of the disjuncture between symbolic interactionism and more widely accepted forms of sociological theorizing; and (3) persistent and widespread inattentiveness to past and present evidence-based arguments that address the argument regarding symbolic interactionism as an astructural, ahistorical, and acritical sociological perspective. The argument frames the historical development of the astructural bias concept in an historically and socially conditioned way, from its emergence through its rejection and ultimately including conclusions about contemporary state of the astructural bias as evidenced in the symbolic interactionist literatures of the last couple of decades. The analysis and argument concludes that the contemporary result of these intertwined historical and social conditioning processes is that the astructural bias myth has been made real in practice, and that the reification of the myth of an astructural bias has had the ruinous effect of virtually eradicating a vital tradition in the interactionist perspective which extends back to the earliest formulations of the perspective. As a result, a handful of suggestions that serve to aid in reclaiming the unorthodox structuralism of symbolic interactionism and the related interactionist study of social organization are provided in the conclusion.

There is a huge amount of social and educational research concerned with various kinds of inequality. Much of this research assumes that inequalities are a bad thing, even when it is solely concerned with providing information about the level and causes of inequalities of some particular kind.¹ Sometimes, however, this use of crude egalitarianism spills over into presentation of what can be read as practical value judgements. Ambiguity between factual conclusion and practical evaluation is frequently exploited, or at least allowed to prevail. As a result, evaluations seem to be expressed, and/or prescriptions for action proposed, with the implication that they are justified by research evidence. Yet, on its own, research evidence can rarely provide a sufficient justification for value conclusions (see Foster et al., 2000; Hammersley, 2003a). While on some occasions research evidence may be treated as pointing directly to value conclusions, there are always value premisses involved, as well as factual ones, and these will often be open to reasonable doubt and disagreement.

The annual sessions of the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women offer many opportunities for feminist social change despite challenges of access and space. Commission sessions focus on producing an outcome document, the Agreed Conclusions, that sets global norms for governmental behavior toward women and girls. Feminist advocates can influence the norms-setting process through written and oral statements, side events, briefings, and direct communications with UN member states. In addition to official meetings that are open to non-governmental organizations with accreditation to the United Nations, a parallel conference of events takes place that is open to all. The parallel conference allows feminist advocates to raise issues such as violence against women, make connections to understand the dynamics of gender inequality, promote feminist language, and learn to use UN tools to advance the well-being of women and girls. In the ferment of discussion and interaction, a global feminist collective consciousness is formed, nurtured, and promulgated. This paper will discuss the feminist origins of the UN Commission on the Status of Women, practices of Commission sessions, and limitations to non-governmental participation in the Commission negotiating process. It will offer suggestions for a more democratic United Nations that opens up sessions to feminist advocates and expands space available for Commission and non-governmental events.