232451 research outputs found
Sort by
Proefschrift; drie stellingen:Redelijkheid*. Een systematische rechtspraakanalyse naar de werking en toepassing van de vennootschapsrechtelijke redelijkheid en billijkheid
No full textAuteur bespreekt drie stellingen die voortvloeien uit zijn proefschrift over art. 2:8 BW. De bijdrage gaat in op de codificatie van (gedrags)normen, de gedragsregulerende functie en de rechterlijke toetsing
From TikTok to Uber to the metaverse:Digital services, servicification, and international investment law
No full textDwaling wegens een uitsluitend toekomstige omstandigheid en de verduurzaming van particuliere woningen
No full textImproving the discriminant validation of multi-item scales
No full textDiscriminant validation examines to what extent constructs measured with multi-item scales, which are hypothesized to be conceptually distinct, are empirically distinct. A literature review of published scale development studies shows that a variety of criteria and approaches to assess discriminant validity are in use. However, the requirements for an appropriate criterion have not been spelled out, which has led to the use of problematic criteria. The present research introduces three requirements that an appropriate discriminant validation criterion should satisfy, concerning the correlation, comparison standard, and comparison method. It shows that the common Fornell and Larcker criterion is based on an inappropriate comparison standard and method and that alternative criteria have weaknesses as well. The authors therefore propose an improved comparison standard, congeneric reliability (CR), and develop a systematic discriminant validation procedure based on CR and an existing criterion (Phi), both of which satisfy the three requirements. The procedure provides continuous measures of support for discriminant validity and accounts for measurement and sampling error. A detailed case study and reanalyses of seven published scale development articles demonstrate the application and strengths of the procedure. Example code and an online application facilitate its implementation.<br/
Catholic Social Tradition in Development: Between Teaching and Learning
No full textHistorically, Catholic social teaching did not spring forth solely from papal reflection but out of a much broader tradition in which various magisterial and nonmagisterial actors interacted to construct this teaching. Yet the social encyclicals themselves do not easily acknowledge any nonmagisterial influence. Some social encyclicals outright reject roles for nonmagisterial actors in the process of constructing the social teaching. Others, especially after the Second Vatican Council, struggle to deal with this fact. This arti- cle searches for the motives behind this phenomenon. By reading key encyclicals, the author shows how this sidestepping of nonmagisterial contributions did not result from any condescending magisterial outlook toward the laity. Rather, it followed from specific neo-Thomist ideas about the nature of Church unity, doctrine and action, and a corresponding idea of the magisterium. These ideas have been shifting since Vatican II, but it took some time to yield fruit in the social tradition itself
Artikel 6 EVRM, het nemo tenetur-beginsel en de restrictie bij het afdwingen van wilsafhankelijk materiaal: wie o wie?
No full textAdverse effects of eye movement desensitization and reprocessing therapy:A neglected but urgent area of inquiry
No full textWhile Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR) is widely recognized as an effective treatment for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), its safety profile remains underexamined. This review critically evaluates the extent to which adverse effects are reported and monitored in EMDR research. We analyzed 51 randomized controlled trials from recent meta-analyses on EMDR for PTSD and found that only nine studies mentioned adverse effects, with just one employing systematic assessment protocols. In five of the nine studies, patients did report adverse effects, typically mild and temporary, but these were often described anecdotally and without predefined criteria or structured monitoring. Dropout is more consistently reported across trials, but it is not a reliable indicator of adverse effects per se. The lack of structured monitoring of adverse effects complicates interpretation of EMDR’s risk – benefit profile and limits informed decision-making in clinical settings. We discuss potential reasons for the underreporting of adverse events. Moreover, as EMDR is increasingly applied beyond PTSD, little is known about its safety in populations with complex comorbidities or in non-PTSD conditions. We also consider potential cognitive risks, such as memory blurring and the subsequent risk of false memory creation, though recent evidence suggests these effects are not robust or clinically concerning. To advance ethical and methodologically sound EMDR research, we propose integrating standardized adverse effects monitoring, preregistration of harm criteria, and safety endpoints alongside efficacy outcomes