38978 research outputs found
Sort by
Prevalence of and reasons for using vapes in an English college sample: A cross-sectional social norms interpretation
No full text
The Neighbours Saving Neighbours Community Volunteer Responder Program for Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest
No full textNeighbours Saving Neighbours (NSN) is a community responder program designed to reduce time to cardiopulmonary resuscitation and defibrillation in out of hospital cardiac arrest. The program integrates vetted, CPR trained, AED equipped volunteers within participating paramedic services and dispatches them in parallel with professional responders to nearby suspected cardiac arrests. This Open Science Framework project hosts program materials, operational protocols, training resources, safety frameworks, and study documentation to support transparency, replication, and evaluation
Individual differences in thematic versus taxonomic semantic organization predict cross-domain analogical reasoning: the moderating role of semantic cognitive flexibility
No full textMetamemory Ratings and Justifications in Middle Childhood
No full textMetacognition is the ability to self-reflect about one’s own cognitive process. This study will focus on better understanding how children (aged 8 - 13) self-reflect about their memory processes by measuring metacognition in multiple different ways including confidence ratings (on a 5 point scale ranging from not sure to really sure) and verbal justifications (e.g., why did you pick that answer, describe in your own words). The current study will investigate the types of words and key phrases that are associated with memory accuracy and confidence. Confidence ratings and verbal justifications are predicted to provide unique information about memory performance. Additionally, an interaction with age is expected such that confidence ratings will be better predictors of memory performance especially for younger children in the sample
Regulating Innovation: The Role of Law in Shaping Business Transformation
No full textInnovation has become a central driver of business transformation, particularly in sectors such as financial technology (FinTech) and artificial intelligence (AI)-enabled services, where digital tools are rapidly reshaping markets, organisational structures, and value creation processes. Innovation is beneficial because it is associated with efficiency, inclusion and competitiveness, but at the same time, it creates regulatory uncertainty, legal risk, and governance challenges. This article discusses the impact of law to drive innovation-oriented business change, in particular, how legal/regulatory frameworks facilitate and limit the development of new business models in FinTech and AI-intensive service sectors. The article uses a doctrinal research approach to examine statutes, regulatory tools, judicial rulings, and policy frameworks that are involved in the governance of innovation, focusing on the areas of data protection, financial regulation, competition law, intellectual property, and corporate governance. The article concludes that law is not just a limitation of innovation, but rather a pivotal infrastructure that organises markets, regulates risk and develops trust. Regulatory sandboxes, risk-based supervision, and principles-based regulation are adaptive regulatory instruments that are displayed to be decisive in mitigating uncertainty, as well as protecting the interests of the public. This article holds that the success of business transformation is pegged on the compatibility of the legal design with the innovation strategy. It ends by providing some recommendations to regulators and firms to encourage responsible innovation, enhance legal certainty, and make compliance a strategic capability in the transformation of businesse
Role of Artificial Intelligence for Environment Protection: An Analysis
No full textArtificial intelligence emerges as a pivotal tool in environmental protection. This domain remains critical for sustaining natural resources vital to human survival. Escalating threats include climate change, air pollution, biodiversity loss. Existing literature explores AI’s technical applications predominantly. It overlooks comprehensive ethno-legal frameworks governing environmental deployment. This reveals a significant research gap. This study investigates AI’s capacity to enhance environmental governance while scrutinizing its ecological footprint. The objective is to evaluate AI’s dual role. AI facilitates sustainable development through innovative solutions. It exacerbates resource consumption concurrently. The study proposes regulatory mechanisms aligned with constitutional mandates–Article 48A and 51A(g), Constitution of India. A mixed-methodology approach integrates doctrinal analysis with case studies. Legal texts include the Environment Protection Act 1986. Case studies dissect AI’s efficacy. Google DeepMind achieves 40% energy reduction in data centers. SilviaTerra maps forest carbon via machine learning. Focus areas cover climate modeling, air quality forecasting, species monitoring, compliance enforcement. Preliminary results indicate AI optimizes environmental data processing—e.g., IBM Green Horizon’s 72-hour pollution forecasts—yielding promising outcomes in predictive accuracy (spatiotemporal trends) and policy support. However, findings highlight AI’s energy-intensive nature—e.g., high carbon emissions from large language models—underscoring unaddressed ecological costs. Implications suggest a balanced framework proves imperative. Reactive Reactive AI applications (e.g., Wildbook’s species tracking) excel in enforcement, yet proactive measures—energy-efficient algorithms—demand prioritization to curb e-waste. This study bridges the gap by advocating adaptive legal standards. These mirror UNFCCC commitments. AI’s environmental benefits must outweigh detriments. This ensures viability. It lays groundwork for future interdisciplinary research into scalable, ethically sound AI deployments, reinforcing sustainable development’s economic, social, environmental triad
Intra-Coalition Conflict and Perceived Leadership Strength: A Survey Experiment on Executive Autonomy
No full textThis project studies how intra-coalition bargaining outcomes affect citizens’ evaluations of executive leadership. The theoretical framework motivating the study posits that voters value not only policy outcomes but also signals of a leader’s capacity to impose her preferred line within the governing coalition.
This study implements a randomized survey experiment in Italy, focusing on salient policy domains (pensions and immigration).
Respondents are randomly assigned to one of three conditions:
Control: no additional information regarding intra-coalition dynamics.
Treatment 1 (Leadership Autonomy): respondents read that the government maintained a restrictive line on pensions/immigration and did not accommodate some requests advanced by the coalition partner (Lega).
Treatment 2 (Coalition Concession): respondents read that the government accommodated several requests advanced by the Lega, modifying the text relative to the line initially indicated by the Prime Minister’s office.
The treatments vary the extent to which the Prime Minister appears to prevail over or concede to coalition partners, while holding constant the general policy domain. The informational intervention is based on media sources that stress different aspects of facts covered.
The main outcomes are respondents’ evaluations (on 1–10 scales) of:
(1) overall performance of the Prime Minister,
(2) leadership capacity, and
(3) communicative skills.
In addition, prior to treatment exposure, respondents report the importance they attach to different executive attributes, including the capacity to prevail over allies, communication skills, international management, and economic stability. These measures allow for heterogeneity analysis based on citizens’ baseline valuation of leadership autonomy.
Research Questions
The experiment addresses the following questions:
- Does information that the Prime Minister prevailed over coalition partners increase perceived leadership capacity?
- Does information that the Prime Minister conceded to coalition partners decrease perceived leadership capacity?
- Do these effects extend to overall performance evaluations, or are they confined to leadership-specific perceptions?
- Are treatment effects moderated by the importance respondents attribute to executive autonomy (i.e., the importance assigned to “far prevalere la propria linea politica rispetto a quella degli alleati”)?
Hypotheses
H1 (Leadership Signal Hypothesis): Respondents exposed to Treatment 1 (leader prevails) will report higher evaluations of leadership capacity than respondents in the control group.
H2 (Concession Penalty Hypothesis): Respondents exposed to Treatment 2 (leader concedes) will report lower evaluations of leadership capacity than respondents in the control group.
H3 (Attribute-Specificity Hypothesis): Treatment effects will be strongest on leadership capacity and weaker (or null) on communicative skills, since the treatment manipulates coalition autonomy rather than communication performance.
H4 (Preference-Moderation Hypothesis): Treatment effects will be larger among respondents who assign higher importance to the executive’s capacity to prevail over coalition partners.
H5: Treatment effects will vary by respondents' partisanship
Expected Outcomes
If voters interpret intra-coalition dominance as a signal of executive strength, Treatment 1 should increase perceived leadership capacity relative to both control and Treatment 2. Conversely, visible concessions should reduce leadership evaluations. The magnitude of these effects is expected to depend on respondents’ prior normative emphasis on executive autonomy. A null effect would suggest that citizens either (i) do not interpret intra-coalition dynamics as informative about leadership strength, or (ii) prioritize substantive policy alignment over signals of autonomy.
Overall, the study provides causal evidence on whether voters reward executive dominance within governing coalitions, directly testing a central behavioral assumption of the theoretical model
Journalistic Coverage of Electronic Cigarettes: A Scoping Review Protocol
No full textElectronic cigarettes have expanded rapidly worldwide, yet scientific understanding of how the media frames and portrays these products remains limited. This scoping review protocol aims to map the scientific literature that analyzes journalistic coverage of electronic cigarettes across different media outlets. The review question is structured using the Population-Concept-Context (PCC) framework as follows: Population refers to communication outlets and media channels (print, digital, television, and radio); Concept refers to journalistic coverage of electronic cigarettes, including vaping, e-cigarettes, and electronic nicotine delivery systems; and Context refers to any country, with no time restrictions. Accordingly, the review question is: What are the characteristics and framings of journalistic coverage of electronic cigarettes across different media outlets in the world literature? The review will be conducted according to the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines and the PRISMA-ScR checklist, with the protocol registered in the Open Science Framework (OSF). Searches will be carried out in the following databases: Redalyc, Google Scholar, Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, Oasisbr, CAPES Journals Portal, and BVS/Lilacs. Study selection will be performed using the Rayyan software. Full-text scientific articles available online, written in Portuguese, English, or Spanish, with no time restrictions, that analyze journalistic coverage of electronic cigarettes will be included. Data will be extracted using a standardized form and results will be presented in a descriptive and narrative format