Explore the vast range of titles available.

The main purpose of this paper is to rationally reconstruct Nozick’s account of unproductivity, especially his characteristically libertarian, and hence uncompromising, ban on fraud. We posit that, when Nozick’s theory is interpreted charitably, it does not yield to contradictory prescriptions concerning permissibility. That is, there does not have to be any inconsistency in the Nozickian ban on certain exchanges, with the ban tracking two properties of the said exchanges; that is, either (1) their unproductivity or (2) their fraudulence. When analyzing economic exchanges, our interest is focused on both productive and unproductive exchanges. However, we suggest that Nozick’s banning exchanges along the lines of their unproductivity tallies poorly with his avowed libertarianism since his position predicts prohibiting unproductive and yet non-fraudulent exchanges. Hence, and we suggest resolving the said tension in a principled libertarian (deontological) manner; that is, by banning and allowing ones, , while submitting that the properties of exchanges such that or are morally inert.

We examined the relationship between workplace emotional blackmail and employee silence by focusing on the mediating effect of employee ego depletion and the moderating effect of employee traditionality. Our aim was to find out how workplace emotional blackmail affects employees' mental health and whether it produces harmful behaviors. We collected empirical data using a two-wave survey of 183 employees of 10 high-tech firms in Southern China. Results showed that workplace emotional blackmail was positively related to employee silence, and employee ego depletion significantly mediated this relationship. In addition, employee traditionality negatively moderated the relationship between workplace emotional blackmail and employee ego depletion. We discuss the implications of the findings and methods of preventing or reducing the occurrence of workplace emotional blackmail from the perspective of enterprises and employees.

From the Fourth Amendment to George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four, and from the Electronic Communications Privacy Act to films like Minority Report and The Lives of Others, our law and culture are full of warnings about state scrutiny of our lives. These warnings are commonplace, but they are rarely very specific. Other than the vague threat of an Orwellian dystopia, as a society we don't really know why surveillance is bad and why we should be wary of it. To the extent that the answer has something to do with \"privacy,\" we lack an understanding of what \"privacy\" means in this context and why it matters. We've been able to live with this state of affairs largely because the threat of constant surveillance has been relegated to the realms of science fiction and failed totalitarian states.

Privacy is a concept in disarray. Nobody can articulate what it means. As one commentator has observed, privacy suffers from \"an embarrassment of meanings.\" Privacy is far too vague a concept to guide adjudication and lawmaking, as abstract incantations of the importance of \"privacy\" do not fare well when pitted against more concretely stated countervailing interests. In I960, the famous torts scholar William Prosser attempted to make sense of the landscape of privacy law by identifying four different interests. But Prosser focused only on tort law, and the law of information privacy is significantly more vast and complex, extending to Fourth Amendment law, the constitutional right to information privacy, evidentiary privileges, dozens of federal privacy statutes, and hundreds of state statutes. Moreover, Prosser wrote over 40 years ago, and new technologies have given rise to a panoply of new privacy harms. A new taxonomy to understand privacy violations is thus sorely needed. This Article develops a taxonomy to identify privacy problems in a comprehensive and concrete manner. It endeavors to guide the law toward a more coherent understanding of privacy and to serve as a framework for the future development of the field of privacy law.

Can transitional justice enhance democratic representation in countries recovering from authoritarian rule? The authors argue that lustration, a policy that reveals secret collaboration with the authoritarian regime, can prevent former authoritarian elites from extorting policy concessions from past collaborators who have been elected as politicians in the new regime. Absent lustration, former elites can threaten to reveal information about past collaboration unless the politicians implement policies these elites desire. In this way, lustration policies enable politicians to avoid blackmail and to be responsive to their constituents, improving the quality of representation. The authors show that whether lustration enhances representation depends on its severity and the extent to which dissidents-turned-politicians would suffer if the skeletons in their closets were revealed. The authors also find that the potential to blackmail politicians increases as the ideological distance between authoritarian elites and politicians decreases. They test this theory with original data from the Global Transitional Justice Dataset, which spans eighty-four countries that transitioned to democracy since 1946.

Recent studies have started to probe into workplace emotional blackmail (WEB); however, the constructs of the concept are still unclear, and no scales with good credibility and validity have been developed. This study is divided into three parts, namely establishing the concept of WEB, developing measuring tools for WEB, and probing into its operating mechanism. In Research 1, the definition and dimensions of WEB were proposed, item-sort task and subject-matter experts were invited to examine the content validity of the construct, and a total of two WEB dimensions were extracted. In Research 2, three separate samples were employed to assess the psychometric properties of a 10-item self-reported WEB scale. In Research 3, the influences of WEB on workers’ job outcome were further examined, and its psychological mechanism was discussed from the perspective of stress theory to establish a nomological network accordingly. The results can provide evidences regarding the psychometric soundness of WEB, which can be used to evaluate workers’ confrontation of WEB. In the final stage of this study, the theoretical and practical contributions of WEB are discussed, and the research directions for applying new measures in the future are provided.

情緒勒索為一種情緒操縱的手段，透過引發被勒索者的負面感受來使其服從或妥協於自己的要求。此概念在近年受到大眾關注，但相關的學術研究卻較少，且多數集中在親密關係或組織管理相關領域中，對於親子關係間的情緒勒索議題討論則相對更少。最主要的原因乃是測量工具較為缺乏，因此，本研究主要目的在於發展評估親子關係間情緒勒索行為之量表，以期能提供此領域研究者合適的測量工具。本研究翻譯Karnani與Zelman（2019）所編修之20題版的情緒勒索量表，並要求參與者以主要照顧者為回憶對象進行情緒勒索經驗評估，有效樣本為356位，平均年齡為25.83歲，其中50位參與者在一個月後接受再測。研究結果顯示，繁體中文版之情緒勒索量表總量表與各分量表（恐懼感、罪惡感、義務感）均具有良好的內部一致性信度（Cronbach’s αs = .86～.95）、再測信度（rs = .81～.90）與組合信度（CRs > .85）。驗證性因素分析結果顯示，本量表之二階三因素具有最佳適配的建構效度（CFI = .976、SRMR= .022、RMSEA = .087），亦具有良好的收斂效度與區別效度（AVEs > .67）。以家長正向支持量表、親子關係滿意度、親子關係品質主觀評分、感恩心為效標，發現本量表具有良好的效標關聯效度。綜上所述，繁體中文版之情緒勒索量表具有良好的信、效度，可用於評估親子關係間的情緒勒索經驗。 Development and Psychometric Analysis of an Emotional Blackmail Scale Emotional blackmail is a form of emotional manipulation where the blackmailer uses negative emotions such as fear, guilt, or obligation to compel the victim to comply with their demands. Despite growing public awareness of emotional blackmail, there is limited academic research on this topic, particularly concerning parent-child relationships. Most existing studies focus on intimate relationships or organizational contexts, leaving a significant gap in understanding emotional blackmail within families. This study aims to fill this gap by developing a scale specifically designed to evaluate emotional blackmail behaviors in parent-child relationships, thereby providing researchers with a suitable measurement tool for this context. Emotional blackmail, a concept introduced by Forward and Frazier in 1997, involves manipulating another person by inducing fear (fear of loss, anger, shame, withdrawal of love), obligation (cultural expectations, role responsibilities), and guilt (blaming or inducing feelings of guilt). Emotional blackmail can significantly damage relationship quality, including reducing intimacy and trust in parent-child relationships, which can affect children’s future relationships and overall well-being. Prior to this research, tools for measuring emotional blackmail were not specifically tailored for parent-child interactions. Existing scales, such as the Emotional Blackmail Scale developed by Karnani and Zelman (2019), were primarily designed for intimate relationships and required adaptation for the parent-child context. Given the cultural importance and prevalence of parent-child dynamics involving emotional manipulation in Asian societies, a tool specifically tailored for these interactions is necessary to understand and address these issues adequately. Methodology The study recruited 381 volunteers aged 20 and above through social media platforms, resulting in a valid sample size of 356 participants with an average age of 25.83 years. To assess the reliability and validity of the Emotional Blackmail Scale, participants completed the traditional Chinese version of the scale, focusing on interactions with their primary caregivers. A subset of 50 participants was retested after one month to examine test-retest reliability. The study used several validity testing tools, including the Parental Positive Support Scale to measure perceived positive support from parents, the Parent-Child Relationship Satisfaction Scale to assess satisfaction with the parent-child relationship, a visual analog scale for subjective evaluation of parent-child relationship quality, and the Gratitude Questionnaire-6 (GQ-6) to measure levels of gratitude. These tools helped evaluate the emotional blackmail scale’s effectiveness in reflecting various aspects of parent-child relationships and emotional traits. Results The study revealed that the Traditional Chinese version of the Emotional Blackmail Scale is a reliable and valid tool for assessing emotional blackmail within parent-child relationships. The results are presented as follows: Reliability Analysis Internal Consistency: The Emotional Blackmail Scale demonstrated high internal consistency across its subscales and total scale. The Cronbach’s alpha coefficients were .91 for the Fear subscale, .86 for the Guilt subscale, and .91 for the Obligation subscale, with an overall alpha of .95 for the entire scale. These values indicate that the items within each subscale are measuring the same underlying construct consistently. Test-Retest Reliability: The scale showed strong test-retest reliability over a one-month interval, with correlation coefficients (rs) ranging from .81 for the Fear subscale, .90 for the Guilt subscale, and .89 for the Obligation subscale, and .89 for the total scale. This stability over time suggests that participants’ responses are consistent and reliable when reassessed after a period of time. Validity Analysis Construct Validity: Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was conducted to examine the factor structure of the Emotional Blackmail Scale. The analysis tested three models: a single-factor model, a first-order three-factor model (with fear, guilt, and obligation as separate but correlated factors), and a second-order three-factor model (where the three factors are linked to a higher-order emotional blackmail factor). The second-order three-factor model demonstrated the best fit to the data, with indices showing good model fit: Comparative Fit Index (CFI) = .976, Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR) = .022, and Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) = .087. The factor loadings for the observed variables on their respective latent factors were all above .70, indicating strong relationships between the items and their corresponding subscales. Convergent and Discriminant Validity: The scale’s subscales showed good convergent validity, with Average Variance Extracted (AVE) values of .73 for Fear, .67 for Guilt, and .76 for Obligation. These values, all above .60, suggest that the items within each subscale are well-correlated and that each subscale captures a distinct aspect of emotional blackmail. Additionally, the Composite Reliability (CR) values for the subscales were .89 for Fear, .85 for Guilt, and .90 for Obligation, indicating that the scale consistently measures the constructs it is intended to assess. Criterion-Related Validity: The scale’s scores were significantly negatively correlated with measures of parental positive support, parent-child relationship satisfaction, and subjective evaluations of relationship quality. Specifically, correlations with the Parental Positive Support Scale ranged from -.54 to -.57, with the Parent-Child Relationship Satisfaction Scale ranging from -.49 to -.59, and with subjective evaluations of relationship quality ranging from -.51 to -.59. These negative correlations indicate that higher levels of perceived emotional blackmail are associated with lower levels of perceived support, satisfaction, and quality in parent-child relationships. Overall, these results demonstrate that the Traditional Chinese version of the Emotional Blackmail Scale is a robust tool with strong reliability and validity, capable of effectively capturing the nuances of emotional blackmail within parent-child relationships. The high reliability and valid structure of the scale make it an important instrument for future research and practical applications in understanding emotional manipulation dynamics in familial settings. Discussion The development of a reliable and valid Chinese version of the Emotional Blackmail Scale for parent-child relationships fills a critical gap in the literature. The scale’s strong psychometric properties make it a valuable tool for future research and practical applications in understanding and addressing emotional blackmail in families. Future research should aim to broaden the sample to include younger age groups, such as high school or middle school students, to explore the developmental trajectory of emotional blackmail experiences. Additionally, collecting demographic information such as residence and education level would help understand the impact of these variables on emotional blackmail experiences. Incorporating dyadic data (e.g., from both parents and children) would provide a more comprehensive understanding of emotional blackmail’s influence on parent-child relationships. In conclusion, the Chinese version of the Emotional Blackmail Scale demonstrates good reliability and validity, making it a useful tool for assessing emotional blackmail in parent-child relationships. This scale can help enhance the understanding of how emotional manipulation affects family dynamics and individual well-being, contributing to improved psychological outcomes for both parents and children.

Given China and Russia’s increasingly aggressive behaviour, balance of threat theory posits that formal US allies should close ranks behind the United States. The literature on alliance politics reinforces this logic by showing that alliances deter aggression and reduce the occurrence of war. Recent developments, however, have somewhat undermined these claims, as the president of the Philippines, Rodrigo Duterte, and the president of Turkey, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, publicly threatened to break ranks with Washington and to realign with China and Russia respectively. How can we make sense of such defiant behaviour? This article argues that populist blackmail elucidates this phenomenon and compares it to three alternative propositions: conventional bandwagoning, bandwagoning for profit, and hard hedging. Based on empirical evidence, the article reveals that the provocative statements of Duterte and Erdogan were not a genuine push for realignment with Beijing and Moscow, but rather political strategies designed to enhance their bargaining power with Washington in the hopes of securing certain concessions, while simultaneously galvanising domestic support to justify their raison d’être and to secure their hold on power. Furthermore, the article infers that two concomitant factors – political grievances and the perceived lack of security assurance – propelled both presidents to resort to blackmail.

While the concept of emotional blackmail originated in the U.S., the measures were developed elsewhere. This research aimed to validate the Workplace Emotional Blackmail Scale (WEBS, Chen et al., Journal of Human Resource Management, 23 , 1–26, 2023 ) with samples of employees (Study 1) and supervisors (Study 2) from diverse industries in the U.S. Consistent with Chen et al.’s ( Journal of Human Resource Management, 23 , 1–26, 2023 ) findings, the confirmatory factor analysis results of both samples indicated that the workplace emotional blackmail construct consists of two dimensions: intimidation and appealing. Moreover, WEBS showed satisfactory reliability and criterion-related validity in both samples (i.e., employee resistance, compliance, and commitment). The research findings suggest that the WEBS scale is adequate for examining the nomological network of emotional blackmail in the workplace.

Do nuclear weapons offer coercive advantages in international crisis bargaining? Almost seventy years into the nuclear age, we still lack a complete answer to this question. While scholars have devoted significant attention to questions about nuclear deterrence, we know comparatively little about whether nuclear weapons can help compel states to change their behavior. This study argues that, despite their extraordinary power, nuclear weapons are uniquely poor instruments of compellence. Compellent threats are more likely to be effective under two conditions: first, if a challenger can credibly threaten to seize the item in dispute; and second, if enacting the threat would entail few costs to the challenger. Nuclear weapons, however, meet neither of these conditions. They are neither useful tools of conquest nor low-cost tools of punishment. Using a new dataset of more than 200 militarized compellent threats from 1918 to 2001, we find strong support for our theory: compellent threats from nuclear states are no more likely to succeed, even after accounting for possible selection effects in the data. While nuclear weapons may carry coercive weight as instruments of deterrence, it appears that these effects do not extend to compellence.