Vast research has sought to better understand the origins and development of rape myth beliefs given the problematic influence of such misconceptions throughout global societies and criminal justice pathways. The current research aims to build on this body of literature by examining the contribution that psychopathic personality traits (affective responsiveness, cognitive responsiveness, interpersonal manipulation, egocentricity) and emotional intelligence may have upon rape myth beliefs. Furthermore, this study will investigate the extent to which sociodemographic characteristics (age, gender, ethnicity, education), and prior (...) experience of sexual victimisation, contribute to variance in rape myth acceptance scores. In total 251 participants (M Age = 31.66) completed an online, self-report questionnaire which included contemporary measures of psychopathy and rape myth acceptance, never previously tested in combination. Results of a hierarchical multiple regression analysis indicate that egocentricity, age, and gender were significantly associated with rape myth beliefs. Emotional intelligence, as well as affective and interpersonal traits of psychopathy, were not directly related with rape mythology. Findings are interpreted alongside previous research, where we suggest there is an urgent need for larger, nationally representative samples, systematically recruited from the general population to help clarify uncertainty in existing literature emerging from small-scale opportunistic datasets. (shrink)

The “atemporal” character of Kirzner’s notion of alertness and discovery, and his insistence that entrepreneurship is independent of factor ownership have attracted many criticisms from within the Austrian camp. However, it is precisely these elements of his theory of entrepreneurship that offer important insights for the analysis of the relation between shareholders and management in the modern corporation. First of all, the Kirznerian perspective allows us to view both groups as entrepreneurial. Secondly, and contrary to modern agency theory and the (...) Rothbardian strand of Austrian economics, it highlights the entrepreneurial role of management in introducing innovation. Finally, we argue that the Kirznerian perspective on the division of the entrepreneurial roles in the corporate firm shares some important ideas with the “resource based view” of the firm.Le caractère “atemporel” des notions kirzneriennes de vigilance et de découverte et l’insistance que met Kirzner à séparer l’activité entrepreneuriale de la propriété des facteurs lui ont valu de nombreuses critiques de la part des économistes autrichiens. Cependant, ce sont précisément ces éléments de sa théorie de l’entrepreneur qui éclairent de manière importante l’analyse de la relation entre actionnaires et gestionnaires dans l’entreprise moderne. Premièrement, la perspective kirznerienne nous permet de considérer que les deux groupes participent de l’activité entrepreneuriale. Deuxièmement, et contrairement à la théorie moderne de l’agence et la variante rothbardienne de l’économie autrichienne, elle met l’accent sur le rôle entrepreneurial de la gestion dans l’émergence d’innovations. Enfin, nous suggérons que la perspective kirznerienne à propos du partage des rôles entrepreneuriaux dans la firme présente des analogies importantes avec la théorie de la firme vue comme un “vivier de ressources”. (shrink)

This article aims to contribute to the literature on conceptual change by engaging in direct theoretical and empirical comparison of contrasting views. We take up the question of whether naïve physical ideas are coherent or fragmented, building specifically on recent work supporting claims of coherence with respect to the concept of force by Ioannides and Vosniadou [Ioannides, C., & Vosniadou, C. (2002). The changing meanings of force. Cognitive Science Quarterly 2, 5–61]. We first engage in a theoretical inquiry on the (...) nature of coherence and fragmentation, concluding that these terms are not well‐defined, and proposing a set of issues that may be better specified. The issues have to do with contextuality, which concerns the range of contexts in which a concept (meaning, model, theory) applies, and relational structure, which is how elements of a concept (meaning, model, or theory) relate to one another. We further propose an enhanced theoretical and empirical accountability for what and how much one needs to say in order to have specified a concept. Vague specification of the meaning of a concept can lead to many kinds of difficulties.Empirically, we conducted two studies. A study patterned closely on Ioannides and Vosniadou's work (which we call a quasi‐replication) failed to confirm their operationalizations of “coherent.” An extension study, based on a more encompassing specification of the concept of force, showed three kinds of results: (1) Subjects attend to more features than mentioned by Ioannides and Vosniadou, and they changed answers systematically based on these features; (2)We found substantial differences in the way subjects thought about the new contexts we asked about, which undermined claims for homogeneity within even the category of subjects (having one particular meaning associated with “force”) that best survived our quasi‐replication; (3) We found much reasoning of subjects about forces that cannot be accounted for by the meanings specified by Ioannides and Vosniadou. All in all, we argue that, with a greater attention to contextuality and with an appropriately broad specification of the meaning of a concept like force, Ioannides and Vosniadou's claims to have demonstrated coherence seem strongly undermined. Students' ideas are not random and chaotic; but neither are they simply described and strongly systematic. (shrink)