1,720,998 research outputs found
Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 52(A) As An Ideological Weapon?
Full text linkIn this article, the author explores Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 52(a) and standard of review choice to determine whether appellate judges can exploit its terms to pursue ideological goals. The author examines the operative terms of Rule 52(a), viz., findings of fact, clear error, and documentary evidence, and concludes that they are so malleable as to give appellate judges wide discretion in deciding whether clear error, de novo, or some other standard of review is to be applied. The article then goes on to identify fact typologies appellate courts invoke (historical, ultimate, constitutional, legislative, sociological, scientific, political, economic, jurisdictional), some which also enables them to circumvent Rule 52(a) and engage in de novo review of a trial court\u27s factual findings. The article concludes that standard of review choices can serve as a prism through which to view a judge\u27s ideological predisposition, especially when those choices are made in an undisciplined, unprincipled manner. The author argues that appellate courts\u27 treatment of Rule 52(a) and fact typology can impair decisional legitimacy, administrative efficiency, and comity between the trial and appellate courts. As Rule 52(a)\u27s malleable character and fact typology serve important jurisprudential functions, the author makes several recommendations to clarify decisional rules as they apply to standard of review, and to mitigate unwarranted perception of ideological bias in making judgments about the applicable standard of review
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Variations on the Author
Full text link“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
Full text linkWe provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
Full text linkWe conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued
use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation
counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more
sophisticated methods
Thugs, Crooks, and Rebellious Negroes: Racist and Racialized Media Coverage of Michael Brown and the Ferguson Demonstrations
Full text linkThe article explores how the media constructs news, and offers extensive history on the adverse narrative media tropes about Black men since colonial newspapers. Through qualitative and quantitative analysis of news narratives and images, this article demonstrates how Ferguson accounts emphasized Brown’s deviance and chaos and disorder. After offering comparative analysis of White criminality and protest news narratives, the article presses upon the social effects of racist and racialized media narratives. The article examines the controversy through First Amendment free speech, hate crimes, and true threat principles as well as FCC regulation of broadcasting, and media ownership. While explicating the First Amendment, regulatory and institutional barriers to curing the harms created, the article arrives upon promising institutional and extra-institutional reforms which can at least provide robust counter-narratives. This article examines the effects of the media’s insistent framing of African-Americans engaged in illegitimate, irrational, and even criminal expressions of dissent. In doing so, the author contends that in rationalizing and restructuring African-American deviance and dissent, the media reasserted a majoritarian ideology in which Whiteness — upon which our social, political, and economic institutions are constructed — maintained its status as the dominant order, and law enforcement responses to “disorder” were endowed with a presumptive correctness. In hewing to a pro-majoritarian orthodoxy, the media ignored the role institutional racism and implicit bias played in Brown’s death. Simultaneously, the media sublimated the more urgent socio-political grievances demonstrators sought to surface around law enforcement and the justice system. This article seeks to impress upon the reader the most injurious long-term impact of the news media approach to the Ferguson saga. As a basis of discourse, news is just one type of media content that enables a society to build consensus (if not agreement) over myriad social problems, and solutions to those problems. By constructing Brown as the blameworthy ‘victim’ from the outset, and through unrelenting focus upon Ferguson looting and criminality, the media subverted and derailed any real opportunity to have a meaningful discourses around race, law enforcement and justice system reform, or the myriad social, political, and economic issues Ferguson came to symbolize
koamabayili/VECTRON-author-checklist: VECTRON author checklist
No full textWe have done our best to complete the author checklist relating to the use of animals in the hut study. Note that the objective for the hut study was to evaluate the IRS treatment applications for residual efficacy against Anopheles mosquitoes, including the local An. coluzzii mosquito population. Cows were only used to attract mosquitoes into the huts and no tests were carried out directly on the cows. The author checklist is intended for use with studies where experiments are carried out on animals, which is why we have had such difficulty in completing this for the hut study, as many of the questions do not relate to how the cows were used
Recommended from our members
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 52(A) as an Ideological Weapon?
No full textIn this article, the author explores Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 52(a) and standard of review choice to determine whether appellate judges can exploit its terms to pursue ideological goals. The author examines the operative terms of Rule 52(a), viz., findings of fact, clear error, and documentary evidence, and concludes that they are so malleable as to give appellate judges wide discretion in deciding whether clear error, de novo, or some other standard of review is to be applied. The article then goes on to identify fact typologies appellate courts invoke (historical, ultimate, constitutional, legislative, sociological, scientific, political, economic, jurisdictional), some which also enables them to circumvent Rule 52(a) and engage in de novo review of a trial court\u27s factual findings The article concludes that standard of review choices can serve as a prism through which to view a judge\u27s ideological predisposition, especially when those choices are made in an undisciplined, unprincipled manner. The author argues that appellate courts\u27 treatment of Rule 52(a) and fact typology can impair decisional legitimacy, administrative efficiency, and comity between the trial and appellate courts. As Rule 52(a)\u27s malleable character and fact typology serve important jurisprudential functions, the author makes several recommendations to clarify decisional rules as they apply to standard of review, and to mitigate unwarranted perception of ideological bias in making judgments about the applicable standard of review
- …
