Socio-cognitive determinants of consumers’ support for the fair trade movement

Despite the reasonable explanatory power of existing models of consumers’ ethical decision making, a large part of the process remains unexplained. This article draws on previous research and proposes an integrated model that includes measures of the theory of planned behavior, personal norms, self-identity, neutralization, past experience, and attitudinal ambivalence. We postulate and test a variety of direct and moderating effects in the context of a large survey with a representative sample of the U.K. population. Overall, the resulting model represents an empirically robust and holistic attempt to identify the most important determinants of consumers’ support for the fair-trade movement. Implications and avenues for further research are discussed

The paradoxical role of meritocratic selection in the perpetuation of social inequalities at school

The school system is intended to offer all students the same opportunities, but most international surveys reveal an overall lower achievement for students from disadvantaged groups compared with more advantaged students. Recent experimental research in social psychology has demonstrated that schools as institutions contribute with their implicit cultural norms and structure to the production of inequalities. This chapter examines the role that a structural feature of school, namely meritocratic selection, plays in this reproduction of inequalities at school. First, we describe how meritocracy in the educational system can hold paradoxical effects by masking the virtuous/vicious cycles of opportunities created by educational institutions. Second, we present recent research suggesting that selection practices relying on a meritocratic principle—more than other practices—can lead to biased academic decisions hindering disadvantaged students. We propose that inequalities in school might not just result from isolated failures in an otherwise functional meritocratic system, but rather that merit-based selection itself contributes to the perpetuation of inequalities at school

Large expert-curated database for benchmarking document similarity detection in biomedical literature search

Document recommendation systems for locating relevant literature have mostly relied on methods developed a decade ago. This is largely due to the lack of a large offline gold-standard benchmark of relevant documents that cover a variety of research fields such that newly developed literature search techniques can be compared, improved and translated into practice. To overcome this bottleneck, we have established the RElevant LIterature SearcH consortium consisting of more than 1500 scientists from 84 countries, who have collectively annotated the relevance of over 180 000 PubMed-listed articles with regard to their respective seed (input) article/s. The majority of annotations were contributed by highly experienced, original authors of the seed articles. The collected data cover 76% of all unique PubMed Medical Subject Headings descriptors. No systematic biases were observed across different experience levels, research fields or time spent on annotations. More importantly, annotations of the same document pairs contributed by different scientists were highly concordant. We further show that the three representative baseline methods used to generate recommended articles for evaluation (Okapi Best Matching 25, Term Frequency–Inverse Document Frequency and PubMed Related Articles) had similar overall performances. Additionally, we found that these methods each tend to produce distinct collections of recommended articles, suggesting that a hybrid method may be required to completely capture all relevant articles. The established database server located at https://relishdb.ict.griffith.edu.au is freely available for the downloading of annotation data and the blind testing of new methods. We expect that this benchmark will be useful for stimulating the development of new powerful techniques for title and title/abstract-based search engines for relevant articles in biomedical research

Histories of Social Psychology in Europe and North America, as Seen from Research Topics in Two Key Journals

The study presented in this chapter compares European and US social psychology through the analysis of papers published by two pivotal journals in the discipline: Journal of Personality and Social Psychology and the European Journal of Social Psychology. Scientific production can be considered a starting point for the study of the history of a discipline as it includes theories, application domains and methods that contribute to delineate its trajectory. All the abstracts (from the first publication to the last one in 2016) of the papers of the two journals were collected. By means of a correspondence analysis, the existence of a latent temporal pattern in keywords’ occurrences was explored. Furthermore, in order to detect, retrieve and compare the main topics the journals dealt with over time, an analysis implemented by means of Reinert’s method was conducted. The topics evolution along time was thus observed and matched in the two journals. Results showed that the two journals have common trajectories particularly in their inception (among others, studies on aggression and attribution) and more recently (among others, studies on gender by means of implicit measures and culture). However, the distinctive feature that characterises the US social psychology, that is the attention on the individual aspects, and the one that characterises the European one, that is the attention on social aspects, seems to remain