scholarly journals Anatomy of the Italian occupational structure: concentrated power and distributed knowledge

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Armanda Cetrulo ◽  
Dario Guarascio ◽  
Maria Enrica Virgillito
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Division Of Labor ◽  
Empirical Investigation ◽  
Hierarchical Structures ◽  
Knowledge Generation ◽  
Occupational Structure ◽  
Distributed Knowledge ◽  
Level Of Aggregation ◽  
Micro Level ◽  
The U.S

Abstract Which type of work do Italians perform? In this contribution, we aim at detecting the anatomy of the Italian occupational structure by taking stock of a micro-level dataset registering the task content, the execution of procedures, the knowledge embedded in the work itself, called ICP (Indagine Campionaria sulle Professioni), the latter being comparable to the U.S. O*NET dataset. We perform an extensive empirical investigation moving from the micro to the macro level of aggregation. Our results show that the Italian occupational structure is strongly hierarchical, with the locus of power distinct by the locus of knowledge generation. It is also weak in terms of collaborative and worker involvement practices, and possibility to be creative. Our analysis allows to pinpoint the role exerted by hierarchical structures, decision-making autonomy, and knowledge as the most relevant attributes characterizing the division of labor.

scholarly journals Racial disparity in police killings : an analysis of 2014 United States lethal force data

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Michael Laughlin
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Police Officers ◽  
Racial Disparity ◽  
Lethal Force ◽  
Police Data ◽  
Micro Level ◽  
Force Data ◽  
The U.S

The main purpose of this research is to create a reliable database concerning law enforcement use of lethal force and employ this database to evaluate whether evidence exists that the decision to use lethal force is impacted by micro-level (officer) race-based considerations. A new database of all lethal force incidents in the U.S. in 2014 was created using 2014: Killed by Police Data and several other websites: 2014: Intentional Lethal Force Data (Menifield and Laughlin, 2018). African American victims were overrepresented and Caucasian victims were underrepresented in police officers' use of lethal force. However, this database and analysis provide no evidence of micro-level discriminatory decision making in the deployment of lethal force by law enforcement. Further, findings do not support the argument that the decision to use lethal force by law enforcement in the U.S. is influenced by race. This research calls into question a number of prevoiusly held assumptions when exploring racially disparate outcomes in lethal force; i.e. these data show greater support for factors external to law enforcement (as opposed to internal) as contributors to disparate outcomes, and questions whether population proportion should be the comparison point for law enforcement use of lethal force.

scholarly journals The Deinstitutionalization (?) of the House of Representatives: Reflections on Nelson Polsby's “The Institutionalization of the U.S. House of Representatives” at Fifty

2018 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 166-187
Author(s):  
Jeffery A. Jenkins ◽  
Charles Stewart
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
House Of Representatives ◽  
Empirical Investigation ◽  
Historical Context ◽  
Lateral Movement ◽  
Party Leadership ◽  
Classic Article ◽  
Primary Measure ◽  
The U.S ◽  
Decision Making Criteria

This article revisits Nelson Polsby's classic article “The Institutionalization of the U.S. House of Representatives” fifty years after its publication, to examine whether the empirical trends that Polsby identified have continued. This empirical exploration allows us to place Polsby's findings in broader historical context and to assess whether the House has continued along the “institutionalization course”—using metrics that quantify the degree to which the House has erected impermeable boundaries with other institutions, created a complex institution, and adopted universalistic decision-making criteria. We empirically document that careerism plateaued right at the point Polsby wrote “Institutionalization,” and that the extension of the careerism trend has affected Democrats more than Republicans. The House remains complex, but lateral movement between the committee and party leadership systems began to reestablish itself a decade after “Institutionalization” was published. Finally, the seniority system as a mechanism for selecting committee chairs—the primary measure of universalistic decision-making criteria—has been almost thoroughly demolished. Thus, most of the trends Polsby identified have moderated, but have not been overturned. We conclude by considering the larger set of interpretive issues that our empirical investigation poses.

Authorship Decision Making: An Empirical Investigation

2006 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robyn J. Geelhoed ◽  
Julia C. Phillips ◽  
Ann R. Fischer ◽  
Elaine Shpungin ◽  
Younnjung Gong
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Empirical Investigation

Meddling in the Ballot Box

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dov H. Levin
Keyword(s):  
Statistical Analysis ◽  
Theoretical Model ◽  
Preliminary Analysis ◽  
Great Powers ◽  
Archival Research ◽  
Micro Level ◽  
Election Results ◽  
Level Analysis ◽  
The U.S ◽  
Scholarly Attention

This book examines why partisan electoral interventions occur as well as their effects on the election results in countries in which the great powers intervened. A new dataset shows that the U.S. and the USSR/Russia have intervened in one out of every nine elections between 1946 and 2000 in other countries in order to help or hinder one of the candidates or parties; the Russian intervention in the 2016 U.S. elections is just the latest example. Nevertheless, electoral interventions receive scant scholarly attention. This book develops a new theoretical model to answer both questions. It argues that electoral interventions are usually “inside jobs,” occurring only if a significant domestic actor within the target wants it. Likewise, electoral interventions won’t happen unless the intervening country fears its interests are endangered by another significant party or candidate with very different and inflexible preferences. As for the effects it argues that such meddling usually gives a significant boost to the preferred side, with overt interventions being more effective than covert ones in this regard. However, unlike in later elections, electoral interventions in founding elections usually harm the aided side. A multi-method framework is used in order to study these questions, including in-depth archival research into six cases in which the U.S. seriously considered intervening, the statistical analysis of the aforementioned dataset (PEIG), and a micro-level analysis of election surveys from three intervention cases. It also includes a preliminary analysis of the Russian intervention in the 2016 U.S. elections and the cyber-future of such meddling in general.

scholarly journals An Exploratory Study of Research Data Governance in the U.S.

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 122-142
Author(s):  
Inna Kouper ◽  
Anjanette H Raymond ◽  
Stacey Giroux
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Exploratory Study ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Science And Society ◽  
Data Governance ◽  
Knowledge Commons ◽  
Multiple Voices ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Commons ◽  
The U.S

AbstractMaking decisions regarding data and the overall credibility of research constitutes research data governance. In this paper, we present results of an exploratory study of the stakeholders of research data governance. The study was conducted among individuals who work in academic and research institutions in the US, with the goal of understanding what entities are perceived as making decisions regarding data and who researchers believe should be responsible for governing research data. Our results show that there is considerable diversity and complexity across stakeholders, both in terms of who they are and their ideas about data governance. To account for this diversity, we propose to frame research data governance in the context of polycentric governance of a knowledge commons. We argue that approaching research data from the commons perspective will allow for a governance framework that can balance the goals of science and society, allow us to shift the discussion toward protection from enclosure and knowledge resilience, and help to ensure that multiple voices are included in all levels of decision-making.

scholarly journals Sustainable Investments in Responsible SMEs: That’s What’s Distinguish Government VCs from Private VCs

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 25
Author(s):  
Jeaneth Johansson ◽  
Malin Malmström ◽  
Joakim Wincent
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Investment Decisions ◽  
Societal Impact ◽  
Venture Capitalists ◽  
Decision Making Processes ◽  
Micro Level ◽  
Sustainable Investments ◽  
Private Venture ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Level Performance

Researchers question the impact of governmental venture capitalists (GVC) compared to private venture capitalists (PVC), but we know little about why this difference occurs and if this criticism is justified. We observed a group of GVCs and developed a new model that describes the way that GVCs process signals pre- and post-decisions. Certain macro level factors severely undermine micro level performance, causing GVCs to financially underperform with respect to PVCs. This helped us to understand that GVCs do not make investment decisions in the same way as PVCs, and what undermines the performance of GVCs’ decision-making processes. The main goals of GVCs are to promote investments in responsible SMEs, mobilizing societal impact. We discuss that the criticism of GVC needs to be more nuanced, as they have a different role than PVC in the financial system as providers of sustainable investments in responsible SMEs.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document