324 research outputs found
Legislating on Arbitration in Singapore: Linguistic Insights
No full textArbitration, a cost-effective and expeditious alternative to court litigation, takes place within complex and important national and international legal frameworks where legislation, rules, and conventions provide specialized regimes for the conduct of arbitrations. In recent years, Singapore has given evidence of a significant legislative activity in its fervor to make arbitration quicker and more efficient, and therefore has adopted domestic and international regimes that govern private commercial arbitration: the domestic Arbitration Act 2001 (AA) and the International Arbitration Act 2002 (IAA). While these laws differ from each other in matters of arbitral proceedings, they also reflect the best practice in dispute resolution used in the Asia Pacific Region, where Singapore is a regional and financial centre that serves as a gateway between East and West.
The purpose of this paper is to examine the arbitral regime and practice arising from the Singapore Arbitration Act 2001. The paper will look at the piece of legislative drafting from the perspective of language use in order to gain insights into the rhetorical and discursive features realized in the construction of the genre. First, the paper will outline the nature and topic of a two-ranked arbitral regime (AA – IAA) that is of relevance for the arbitration framework in Singapore. Secondly, the paper will analyze quantitatively and qualitatively the linguistic and textual choices realized in the professional/institutional practice and discourse of the genre, while also identifying those features which seem to constrain the accessibility and interpretation of legislative action performed in the genre. To the extent that Singapore inherited the Western-style legal culture of the English common law tradition, this part of the paper will also assess how the Singapore Arbitration Act borrowed semantic resources from the English Arbitration Act 1996 previously investigated by this author (Tessuto 2003), therefore giving rise to manifestations of “interdiscursivity” (Bhatia 2008, 2010a, 2011) from the discursive process and professional practice of English arbitration. Finally, the paper will draw some conclusions from the analysis of the most salient rhetorical and discursive data in the chosen genre, by adding as yet to our understanding of the intercultural and interdiscursive elements of drafting in the Eastern and Western socio-legal contexts
The Effect of Demographic and Psychological Factors on Vaccine Reluctance in COVID-19 : A systematic review
No full textBackground: Though the COVID-19 pandemic claimed millions of lives worldwide, advanced vaccine research resulted in the quick evolvement of many potential vaccines. Despite mass vaccine availability, people across the globe were revealed to be uncertain about receiving the vaccination against COVID-19.
Objectives: The current chapter, following a systematic review approach, addresses three crucial questions: (a) worldwide COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and hesitancy rates, (b) demographic factors determining the COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and hesitancy, and (c) psychological factors influencing COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and hesitancy.
Method: The protocol was registered with PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42022369290). No funding was received for the current systematic review. PubMed and Scopus databases were searched for published articles in peer-reviewed journals in English from December 2020 to October 2022. Records numbering 1,201 were identified, and 54 studies were finally included.
Results: Twenty demographic and 11 psychological factors were identified as significant determining factors of vaccine acceptance and hesitancy across 54 studies in the current systematic review. Most frequent factors are plotted against the number of studies they appeared in.
Discussion: Several other factors, such as symptoms of anxiety and depression, marital status, and political ideologies, were linked with vaccine acceptance and hesitancy and can be the scope of future studies as the current study was limited to discussing the most prominent factors that repeatedly appeared in five or more studies.
Conclusion: By identifying the prominent factors, the current review contributes crucially to the COVID-19-related scientific literature emphasising the requirement of addressing these factors while designing public health interventions/mass vaccination during a pandemi
- …
