Preliminary Studies of a Measure of Conscientiousness

Psychologists have been interested in personality characteristics for decades. One characteristic of personality studied by researchers is that of conscientiousness. Conscientiousness can de defined as a degree of organization, persistence, and motivation in goal-directed behavior (Costa & McCrae, 1985, p.2) This study divided the terms defining conscientiousness into three categories for purpose of item development: organization, persistence, and motivation. Organization incudes, but is not limited to, being organized, reliable, and practical. Persistence includes concepts of responsibleness, thoroughness, and commitment to hard-work. Motivation involves characteristics of enthusiasm, morality, cautiousness, and seriousness. The purpose of this study was to develop a measure that is sensitive to the short-term state rather than the long-term trait aspects of conscientiousness. Short-term states would include behaviors that may be temporary, brief, and extrinsic in nature and traits would include more enduring patterns of behavior. This study consisted of three parts: (a) an investigation of content validity on draft questions, (b) a preliminary study of consistency reliability of a new scale of state conscientiousness, and (c) a preliminary examination of the construct validity of the new scale. Questions were generated to tap the three domains of conscientiousness as listed by Costa and McCrae (1985). The investigation of the content validity on 63 draft questions yielded a final set of 24 items. The internal consistency study was completed on 87 subjects from a Northwest university. Internal consistency ranged from .86 in the trait scenario to .94 in the state scenario. Examining the construct validity with the relationships between the new scale and the Goldberg trait measure of conscientiousness, a Pearson correlation of .73 was obtained, which was significant at the .001 level

Reconciliation and Peace Economics in Cyprus. Summary of Findings (February 2012). Report to the European Commission (EuropeAid Cypriot Civil Society in Action II Programme)

II. Executive Summary Funding and Aims of Project This report presents summary findings from the project ‘Reconciliation andPeace Economics in Cyrus’ (April 2010 – February 2012). The project was funded by the EuropeAid Cypriot Civil Society in Action IIprogramme aiming to promote ‘a conducive environment for the furtherdevelopment of trust, dialogue, cooperation and closer relationship between the Turkish Cypriot and Greek Cypriot communities...’ Funding was as Stream C support for ‘NGOs and international organisations promoting reconciliation projects including research leading to a better understanding of issues affecting trust between the two communities.’ From the start of project, it was apparent that there was little hope for asettlement and the project concluded as the UN-sponsored talks again failed. Project Activities Activities involved research, dialogue and dissemination. Research in Cyprus was based on: a general household survey; a crossing-point survey; focus groups; and interviews. All research took place on bothsides of the Green Line. Dialogue took place in four symposia and one bi-communal event. Dissemination has taken place through provision of findings at a bi-communal event and this report. There were also meetings with personnelfrom NGOs and overseas missions in Cyprus. The EU Context The Republic of Cyprus is highly unusual as an EU member which does nothave full control over its constitutionally claimed territory. The Green Line Regulation severely restricts the scope of trade and movementbetween the Republic of Cyprus and northern Cyprus. Reconciliation The two communities do not agree on what the Cyprus problem is and thereis little agreement about arrangements for a post-solution state. There is marked reluctance to recognise the other side, as well as interact evenwith the checkpoints open. Most Cypriots do not cross the Green Line or have only done so once or twice,so bi-communal contact is limited to a small percentage of the population. There is notable societal mistrust both within as well as between communities. There is suspicion about political leadership and the direction of the talks. While the Turkish Cypriot community tends to view the cause of the Cyprusproblem as an issue between the communities, the Greek Cypriot communitytends to view the cause as external. Given this fundamental disagreement, it is highly problematic from the outsetto effectively apply reconciliation initiatives. The low level of interaction and interdependence between the communitiesalso means that a starting point of moves towards reconciliation is absent. EU policy in Cyprus could more usefully at this time move to addressingsocietal trust issues within each community rather than between them. Peace Economics Both Cypriot economies are developing separately and in different directions. Increased economic interaction may not be required for future prosperity, butit is a crucial component to anchor an effective peace process. While the economy of northern Cyprus is clearly weaker than that of theRepublic of Cyprus, this does not equate to actual household poverty. Comparatively, Turkish Cypriots reported greater access to capital and agreater ability to save money than Greek Cypriots. Each side engages in different activity when they cross; Greek Cypriots tend to visit places of interest, worship or their families’ former home areas, while Turkish Cypriots more often shop, consume and access public hospitals. Greek Cypriots especially are resistant to spending money in the north toavoid supporting its economy, and spend less than Turkish Cypriots crossing. Significant regulatory obstacles to economic interaction remain in place, whileeconomic relations cannot be divorced from considerations of social trust. Substantive change in economic relations depends on political movement anda transformation of the rules of engagement across the Green Line. Assumptions about the relative strengths and weaknesses of both communities’ economies need to be realistically re-examined. Delivery Evaluation of the project confirms that the research and disseminationelements were appropriate. However, dialogue was less successful. There is a lack of wide interest in attending participatory events, in partbecause the Cyprus talks have dragged on for so long without result. The number of projects and events funded by the EU and others suggests thatproject fatigue detracts from significant interest in individual events. With no apparent programme coordination among the Cypriot Civil Societyin Action projects, the EU is not making best use of its EuropeAid investment

Sensationalism made real : the role of realism in the production of sensational affect

Like all complicated relationships, that between realism and sensationalism has been subject to a good deal of rumour and speculation. In what might be described as the pair's first critical encounter – in an 1852 joint review of W. M. Thackeray's The History of Henry Esmond and Wilkie Collins's proto-sensation novel Basil – a critic for Bentley's Miscellany intimates that a partnership between two such different forms is anything but likely. “We have,” he explains, “put these two books ‘over against’ each other, to use one of Mr. Thackeray's favourite Queen-Anne-isms, because they have no kind of family resemblance. They are, indeed, as unlike each other as any two books can be. They constitute a kind of literary antithesis” (“Esmond” 576). The inherently contradictory nature of this originary “over against” gesture – conflating proximity and distance, contiguity and difference – sets the keynote for subsequent discussions, contemporaneous and current, of a generic relationship that continues to attract and elude definition

El secreto de miss Aurora

Según la Relación de Impresores de la Región de Murcia, la producción de la imp. comprende de 1883 a 190

The Growing Block’s past problems

The Growing-Block view of time has some problems with the past. It is committed to the existence of the past, but needs to say something about the difference between the past and present. I argue that we should resist Correia and Rosenkranz’ (Oxford studies in metaphysics, vol 8, pp 333–350, 2013) response to Braddon-Mitchell’s (Analysis 64:199–203, 2004) argument that the Growing-Block leads to scepticism about whether we are present. I consider an approach, similar to Peter Forrest (Analysis 64:358–362, 2004), and show it is not so counter-intuitive as Braddon-Mitchell suggests and further show that it requires no ‘semantic and metaphysical gymnastics’, as Chris Heathwood (Analysis 65:249–251, 2005) has suggested. In doing these things I make the problem of the past on the Growing-Block view a problem in its history, not its present