Maastricht University - Open Journals
Not a member yet
451 research outputs found
Sort by
Conclusion
Get PDFThis Joint Volume has sought to combine seven papers, which all incorporated the notion of transparency, in various ways, as the center piece of their research. The authors have looked at important dimensions in nowadays society and analyzed whether the notion of transparency is visible and how. As the idea of transparency is a central element in all spheres of society, the chosen topics demonstrate the wide-ranging investigation of areas of expertise. Nevertheless, all chapters sought to detect to which degree transparency is practiced in particular spheres and how this affects democratic accountability, institutional efficiency as well as social discipline. Of course next to the question of how to reach more transparency the issue of how much transparency is needed as well as desirable cannot be neglected
Preface
No full textSince the start of the MaRBLe program at the Faculty of Psychology and Neuroscience in 2009, four cohorts of students have been given the opportunity to complete an extensive research project as their Bachelor’s thesis. In this special issue you will find contributions from students of each of those cohorts, who conducted their research in the area of Psychology and Law. The first article is an experience report describing the entire process from choosing a topic to finishing the thesis and presenting the results at a student conference. This article is especially of interest to students who are planning to participate in MaRBLe in the coming years. The remaining six articles are short research reports, each describing a different research project.
A Precious Gift to Politics: an Investigation into Analytical Discourse Evaluation
Get PDF Should liberal democratic societies accept Teun Dekker’s Analytical Discourse Evaluation as a gift from analytical philosophy? In this essay, the premises on which Analytical Discourse Evaluation is based are the topic under investigation. By performing Analytical Discourse Evaluation on Analytical Discourse Evaluation, some of the hidden structures behind Teun Dekker’s argument in favor of the use of Analytical Discourse Evaluation are lifted out of the fog. In this contribution, both the Data side and one of the possible Warrant sides of Teun Dekker’s argument are reconstructed according to Toulmin’s model. Subsequently, each side of the argument is evaluated rigorously. In this manner, it is shown which premises lie at the core of Teun Dekker’s argument. Ultimately, three basic Claims will sketch the position one has to agree to before one can accept this precious gift to politics.
The Common Statute for the Members of the European Parliament: Wise Men and Clear Guidance
Get PDFIn 2005, the European Parliament adopted a Common Statute for its Members. For the first time in the history of the institution, all its members were paid the same basic salary. Prior to the reform, the remuneration of MEPs was aligned to the salary of their respective national parliaments. The remuneration of high civil servants in closely tied to values implicit in a political culture. Hence agreeing on a unitary salary implies a compromise on sensitive differences in political culture. This paper explicates and analyzes the arguments that were given in favor of a common salary. Which normative concepts were employed in the discourse that led to a Common Statute? As such, this paper aspired to make a modest contribution to the curious question of how normative principles are debated in the EU context
Preface
Get PDFThe Marble (Maastricht Researched Based Learning for Excellence) programme at SBE facilitates the development of research projects for highly motivated and excellent undergraduate students. Students attending the bachelor programme of Economics and International Business can join the Marble programme in the third year of their study. During the third year they perform a short research which deals with their specialization or major. The findings are presented at a mini symposium in December or June and documented in a research paper. This series contains the best research papers in the academic year 2012/13 and represent the different types of research in the programmes
The function of the medial prefrontal cortex in emotions and empathy
Get PDFSeveral approaches divide empathy into emotional and cognitive subparts. The emotional reactions are strongly related to the mirror neuron system and interact with cognitive processes as the theory of mind. The aim of this review is to investigate the relationship between empathy and emotions. For this reason the review focuses on the medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC), because it is involved in empathy, emotion regulation, and self-conscious emotions. Overall, it can be concluded that mPFC distinguishes between self-generated emotions and empathy-generated emotions based on a self-other distinction. These findings suggest a shared network of empathy, emotion regulation and self-conscious emotions in cortical regions
The effect of shared leadership on team performance in international undergraduate students
Get PDFThe current study examined how shared leadership influences a teams\u27 performance among international undergraduate students. Shared leadership is a team property where two or more leaders are present in a team, sharing the lead and associated responsibilities. The study used a longitudinal design with five consecutive measurements during a six week period to inspect the temporal development and the various factors influencing shared leadership. The statistical analysis showed that shared leadership changed over time and both shared leadership and the personality trait conscientiousness predicted team performance. Correlation between motivation and team performance and an interaction effect between motivation and shared leadership could not be confirmed. Implications of the findings are discussed with reference to the current literature
Framing Transparency in the U.S. – Cross-media Analysis of the Debate on WikiLeaks
Get PDFSome scholars have argued that the novelty of WikiLeaks for transparency is its usage of new technologies, acting as an example for the start of a new technological information era. Cull (2011), for instance, has argued that WikiLeaks exemplifies a “shift in power” made possible by “the technological revolution” that “has given one individual the communication power that was the monopoly of the nation state in the previous century” (pp. 2-3). As Bunz (2011) further outlines, Wikileaks shows how information from one can be send to many through the “digitalisation of knowledge” (pp. 139-140), whereby it has become easy to transport a great amount of information using minimal space. Furthermore, it demonstrates that the autopsy of data has become easy as programs help us order and analyse information. It is also an example of how the Internet has made it possible for anyone to publish and access information at any time (ibid.). In this chapter, we suggest that technology alone is insufficient to create different transparency standards and change the way politics are conducted. In line with Florini (2002), we believe that “transparency is a choice, encouraged by changing attitudes about what constitutes appropriate behavior” (p. 13). Thus, new technology must be accompanied by a change in attitudes, as “without a norm of transparency, technology will continue to protect private information as well as ferret it out” (Florini, 2002, p. 15). Studying the debate triggered by WikiLeaks presents the opportunity to examine whether its revelations have strengthened transparency in public perception, or if WikiLeaks is no more than the example of new technological means without any real impact on the discursive boundary between publicity and secrecy
Guilty or innocent? About the role of choice blindness and own-race bias in eyewitness identifications
No full textMost of us would say that we would notice if the ice-cream seller gave us strawberry ice-cream, when we actually asked for chocolate. However, several studies indicate that people do not always notice changes in the outcome of their decisions. This phenomenon is called choice blindness and occurs in a wide variety of domains. Apparently, it is even possible that eyewitnesses do not notice that the person they identified from a lineup earlier is not identical with a person presented to them later. If this already occurs in own-race cases, what should we expect if an eyewitness has to identify a person from another race? Due to the own-race bias, people have more difficulty in recognizing faces from another race than from their own race. Do people also have more difficulty in noticing a switch in the outcome of their identification decision when they have to identify other-race faces compared to own-race faces? The present article, we examine the role of choice blindness and the own-race bias in the performance of eyewitnesses
Directive 85/374 – European Victory or a Defective Product Itself?
Get PDF Over the last few decades, product liability has become a well-established area of European private law. It surfaced as a subject in its own right in the US in 1963 in the judgment of Greenman v Yuba Power Products. In contrast, modern European product liability originated over two decades later when Directive 85/374 was introduced in 1985, concerning liability for defective products (Product Liability Directive hereafter), and embracing the idea of strict liability of manufacturers for damage caused by circulating a defective product. The Directive aims for full harmonisation and the provision of a high and equal level of consumer protection. In recent years the EU Product Liability Directive has become something of a global smash hit, providing not only a template for EU Member States, but also an international blueprint used by countries worldwide, including South Africa, Australia, Brazil and countries in the Asia Pacific Region when reforming their product liability regimes. There is no doubt that the Directive politically speaking has been a major success, representing arguably the most powerful example of European harmonisation efforts within the area of tort law where previous initiatives have failed,3 and influencing the law worldwide. However its actual impact has been negligible; The Directive has not done much to unify EU product liability law in action, nor strengthened consumer protection. In the majority of countries the implementation of the Directive has not significantly affected the nature or frequency of product liability litigation. If victims sue at all they rarely make use of the special legislation implementing the Directive’s strict liability rules