The Experts below are selected from a list of 9891 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Ashby E Plant - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
prejudice control and interracial relations the role of motivation to respond without prejudice
Journal of Personality, 2009Co-Authors: David A Butz, Ashby E PlantAbstract:A decade of research indicates that individual differences in motivation to respond without prejudice have important implications for the control of prejudice and interracial relations. In reviewing this work, we draw on W. Mischel and Y. Shoda's (1995, 1999) Cognitive-Affective Processing System (CAPS) to demonstrate that people with varying sources of motivation to respond without prejudice respond in distinct ways to situational cues, resulting in differing situation-behavior profiles in interracial contexts. People whose motivation is self-determined (i.e., the internally motivated) effectively control prejudice across situations and strive for positive interracial interactions. In contrast, people who respond without prejudice to avoid Social Sanction (i.e., the primarily externally motivated) consistently fail at regulating difficult to control prejudice and respond with anxiety and avoidance in interracial interactions. We further consider the nature of the cognitive-affective units of personality associated with motivation to respond without prejudice and their implications for the quality of interracial relations.
Timothy M Devinney - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
is the Socially responsible corporation a myth the good the bad and the ugly of corporate Social responsibility
Academy of Management Perspectives, 2009Co-Authors: Timothy M DevinneyAbstract:Executive Overview Despite differences of opinion about the efficacy of corporate Social responsibility, there is a general consensus among academics, policy makers, and practitioners that corporations operate with a Social Sanction that requires that they operate within the norms and mores of the societies in which they exist. In this article I argue that the notion of a Socially responsible corporation is potentially an oxymoron because of the naturally conflicted nature of the corporation. This has profound implications for our understanding of corporate Social responsibility, what we view as the relevant issues relating to it, and how we investigate its role and impact.
Lyn M Bechtel - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
shame as a Sanction of Social control in biblical israel judicial political and Social shaming
Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, 1991Co-Authors: Lyn M BechtelAbstract:The history of Judeo-Christian biblical interpretation reflects a strong emphasis on the Sanction of guilt; yet the Sanction of shame probably plays a more significant role in the society. Shame is a different emo tional response and Sanction, arising out of different psychological forces and functioning in different Social constructions from guilt. As a Sanction of behavior shame functions primarily as (1) a means of Social control which attempts to repress aggressive or undesirable behavior; (2) as a pressure that preserves Social cohesion in the com munity through rejection and the creation of Social distance between deviant members and the group; and (3) as an important means of dominating others and manipulating Social status. Its coercive power is available officially to state or local authorities as a formal Sanction (judicial and political shaming) and unofficially to the community as an informal Social Sanction (Social shaming). It is effective in a pre dominantly group-oriented Social structure.
David A Butz - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
prejudice control and interracial relations the role of motivation to respond without prejudice
Journal of Personality, 2009Co-Authors: David A Butz, Ashby E PlantAbstract:A decade of research indicates that individual differences in motivation to respond without prejudice have important implications for the control of prejudice and interracial relations. In reviewing this work, we draw on W. Mischel and Y. Shoda's (1995, 1999) Cognitive-Affective Processing System (CAPS) to demonstrate that people with varying sources of motivation to respond without prejudice respond in distinct ways to situational cues, resulting in differing situation-behavior profiles in interracial contexts. People whose motivation is self-determined (i.e., the internally motivated) effectively control prejudice across situations and strive for positive interracial interactions. In contrast, people who respond without prejudice to avoid Social Sanction (i.e., the primarily externally motivated) consistently fail at regulating difficult to control prejudice and respond with anxiety and avoidance in interracial interactions. We further consider the nature of the cognitive-affective units of personality associated with motivation to respond without prejudice and their implications for the quality of interracial relations.
Raihan Shabib - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Normalizing Community Mask-Wearing: A Cluster Randomized Trial in Bangladesh
EliScholar – A Digital Platform for Scholarly Publishing at Yale, 2021Co-Authors: Abaluck Jason, Kwong, Laura H., Styczynski Ashley, Haque Ashraful, Kabir, Md. Alamgir, Bates-jeffries Ellen, Crawford Emily, Benjamin-chung Jade, Benhachmi Salim, Raihan ShabibAbstract:Background: A growing body of scientific evidence suggests that face masks can slow the spread of COVID-19 and save lives, but mask usage remains low across many parts of the world, and strategies to increase mask usage remain untested and unclear. Methods: We conducted a cluster-randomized trial of community-level mask promotion in rural Bangladesh involving 341,830 adults in 600 villages. We employed a series of strategies to promote mask usage, including free household distribution of surgical or cloth masks, distribution and promotion at markets and mosques, mask advocacy by Imams during Friday prayers, role modeling by local leaders, promoters periodically monitoring passers-by and reminding people to put on masks, village police accompanying those mask promoters, providing monetary rewards or certificates to villages if mask-wearing rate improves, public signaling of mask-wearing via signage, text message reminders, messaging emphasizing either altruistic or self-protection motives for mask-wearing, and extracting verbal commitments from households. The primary objective was to assess which of these interventions would increase proper (covering nose and mouth) wearing of face masks, and secondarily, whether mask promotion unintentionally creates moral hazard and decreases Social distancing. This analysis is part of larger study evaluating the effect of mask-wearing on transmission of SARS-CoV-2. Results:There were 64,937 households in the intervention group and 64,183 households in the control group; study recruitment has ended. In the control group, proper mask-wearing was practiced by 13% of those observed across the study period. Free distribution of masks along with role modeling by community leaders produced only small increases in mask usage during pilot interventions. Adding periodic monitoring by mask promoters to remind people in streets and public places to put on the masks we provided increased proper mask-wearing by 29.0 percentage points (95% CI: 26.7% - 31.3%). This tripling of mask usage was sustained over all 10 weeks of surveillance, which includes a period after intervention activities ended. Physical distancing, measured as the fraction of individuals at least one arm’s length apart, also increased by 5.2 percentage points (95% CI: 4.2%-6.3%). Beyond the core intervention package comprised of free distribution and promotion at households/mosques/markets, leader endorsements plus periodic monitoring and reminders, several elements had no additional effects on mask wearing, including: text reminders, public signage commitments, monetary or non-monetary incentives, altruistic messaging or verbal commitments, or village police accompanying the mask promoters (the last not cross-randomized, but assessed in panel data). No adverse events were reported during the study period. Conclusions: Our intervention demonstrates a scalable and cost-effective method to promote mask adoption and save lives, and identifies a precise combination of intervention activities that were necessary. Comparisons between pilots shows that free mask distribution alone is not sufficient to increase mask-wearing, but adding periodic monitoring in public places to remind people to wear the distributed masks had large effects on behavior. The absence of any further effect of the village police suggests that the operative mechanism is not any threat of formal legal Sanctions, but shame and people’s aversion to a light informal Social Sanction. The persistence of effects for 10 weeks and after the end of the active intervention period, as well as increases in physical distancing, all point to changes in Social norms as a key driver of behavior change. Our cross-randomizations suggest that improved mask-wearing norms can be achieved without incentives that require costly monitoring, that aesthetic design choices and colors can influence mask-wearing, and that surgical masks with a substantially higher filtration efficiency can be a cost-effective alternative to cloth masks (1/3 the cost) and are equally or more likely to be worn. Implementing these interventions – including distribution of free masks, and the information campaign, reminders, encouragement – cost $2.30-$3.75 per villager, or between $8 and $13 per person adopting a mask. Combined with existing estimates of the efficacy of masks in preventing COVID-19 deaths, this implies that the intervention cost $28,000-$66,000 per life saved. Beyond reducing the transmission of COVID-19, mask distribution is likely to be a cost-effective strategy to prevent future respiratory disease outbreaks. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04630054 Funding: GiveWel
-
Normalizing Community Mask-Wearing: A Cluster Randomized Trial in Bangladesh
EliScholar – A Digital Platform for Scholarly Publishing at Yale, 2021Co-Authors: Abaluck Jason, Kwong, Laura H., Styczynski Ashley, Haque Ashraful, Kabir, Md. Alamgir, Bates-jeffries Ellen, Crawford Emily, Benjamin-chung Jade, Benhachmi Salim, Raihan ShabibAbstract:Background: A growing body of scientific evidence suggests that face masks can slow the spread of COVID-19 and save lives, but mask usage remains low across many parts of the world, and strategies to increase mask usage remain untested and unclear. Methods: We conducted a cluster-randomized trial of community-level mask promotion in rural Bangladesh involving 341,830 adults in 600 villages. We employed a series of strategies to promote mask usage, including free household distribution of surgical or cloth masks, distribution and promotion at markets and mosques, mask advocacy by Imams during Friday prayers, role modeling by local leaders, promoters periodically monitoring passers-by and reminding people to put on masks, village police accompanying those mask promoters, providing monetary rewards or certificates to villages if mask-wearing rate improves, public signaling of mask-wearing via signage, text message reminders, messaging emphasizing either altruistic or self-protection motives for mask-wearing, and extracting verbal commitments from households. The primary objective was to assess which of these interventions would increase proper (covering nose and mouth) wearing of face masks, and secondarily, whether mask promotion unintentionally creates moral hazard and decreases Social distancing. This analysis is part of larger study evaluating the effect of mask-wearing on transmission of SARS-CoV-2. Results: There were 64,937 households in the intervention group and 64,183 households in the control group; study recruitment has ended. In the control group, proper mask-wearing was practiced by 13% of those observed across the study period. Free distribution of masks along with role modeling by community leaders produced only small increases in mask usage during pilot interventions. Adding periodic monitoring by mask promoters to remind people in streets and public places to put on the masks we provided increased proper mask-wearing by 29.0 percentage points (95% CI: 26.7% - 31.3%). This tripling of mask usage was sustained over all 10 weeks of surveillance, which includes a period after intervention activities ended. Physical distancing, measured as the fraction of individuals at least one arm’s length apart, also increased by 5.2 percentage points (95% CI: 4.2%-6.3%). Beyond the core intervention package comprised of free distribution and promotion at households/mosques/markets, leader endorsements plus periodic monitoring and reminders, several elements had no additional effect on mask wearing, including: text reminders, public signage commitments, monetary or non-monetary incentives, altruistic messaging or verbal commitments, or village police accompanying the mask promoters (the last not cross-randomized, but assessed in panel data). No adverse events were reported during the study period. Conclusions: Our intervention demonstrates a scalable and cost-effective method to promote mask adoption and save lives, and identifies a precise combination of intervention activities that were necessary. Comparisons between pilots shows that free mask distribution alone is not sufficient to increase mask-wearing, but adding periodic monitoring in public places to remind people to wear the distributed masks had large effects on behavior. The absence of any further effect of the village police suggests that the operative mechanism is not any threat of formal legal Sanctions, but shame and people’s aversion to a light informal Social Sanction. The persistence of effects for 10 weeks and after the end of the active intervention period, as well as increases in physical distancing, all point to changes in Social norms as a key driver of behavior change. Our cross-randomizations suggest that improved mask-wearing norms can be achieved without incentives that require costly monitoring, that aesthetic design choices and colors can influence mask-wearing, and that surgical masks with a substantially higher filtration efficiency can be a cost-effective alternative to cloth masks (1/3 the cost) and are equally or more likely to be worn. Implementing these interventions – including distribution of free masks, and the information campaign, reminders, encouragement – cost $2.30-$3.75 per villager, or between $8 and $13 per person adopting a mask. Combined with existing estimates of the efficacy of masks in preventing COVID-19 deaths, this implies that the intervention cost $28,000-$66,000 per life saved. Beyond reducing the transmission of COVID-19, mask distribution is likely to be a cost-effective strategy to prevent future respiratory disease outbreaks