Explore the vast range of titles available.

This paper applies content analysis on Poland's official perception to the BRI within the context of the U.S.-China competition. By constructing a corpus of Polish government documents, parliamentary records, and media statements from 2015 to 2024, the research integrates qualitative and quantitative methods, including content analysis, word frequency analysis, and cognitive frame analysis, using NVivo software. The results show a predominantly optimistic perception among Poland toward the BRI that overestimate the benefits and underestimating the risks, reflecting a selective perception and cognitive bias. However, Poland's geopolitical concerns have increased, influenced by U.S.-China rivalry and regional security dynamics. This critical study sheds light on how U.S.-China competition affects the foreign policies of other geopolitical players.

This chapter is concerned with climate adaptation in resource‐dependent communities, particularly where potential adaptation strategies incorporate a high degree of uncertainty and potential conflicts. Three approaches used in the field of environmental dispute resolution (EDR) may be relevant to community‐adaptation planning processes in situations where there is considerable uncertainty, conflict or disagreement. These are consensus‐building, joint fact‐finding strategies, and cognitive frames analysis. This chapter briefly describes the nature of these three approaches, and illustrates why and how they could be utilised in community engagement strategies for the purposes of climate change adaptation. Also highlighted is the importance of utilising local community knowledge as a core component of this process.

We introduce a model of strategic thinking in games of initial response. Unlike standard models of strategic thinking, in this framework the player's \"depth of reasoning\" is endogenously determined, and it can be disentangled from his beliefs over his opponent's cognitive bound. In our approach, individuals act as if they follow a cost-benefit analysis. The depth of reasoning is a function of the player's cognitive abilities and his payoffs. The costs are exogenous and represent the game-theoretical sophistication of the player; the benefit instead is related to the game payoffs. Behaviour is in turn determined by the individual's depth of reasoning and his beliefs about the reasoning process of the opponent. Thus, in our framework, payoffs not only affect individual choices in the traditional sense, but they also shape the cognitive process itself. Our model delivers testable implications on players' chosen actions as incentives and opponents change. We then test the model's predictions with an experiment. We administer different treatments that vary beliefs over payoffs and opponents, as well as beliefs over opponents' beliefs. The results of this experiment, which are not accounted for by current models of reasoning in games, strongly support our theory. We also show that the predictions of our model are highly consistent, both qualitatively and quantitatively, with well-known unresolved empirical puzzles. Our approach therefore serves as a novel, unifying framework of strategic thinking that allows for predictions across games.

Recent dimensional models of adversity informed by a neurobiological deficit framework highlights threat and deprivation as core dimensions, whereas models informed by an evolutionary, adaptational and functional framework calls attention to harshness and unpredictability. This report seeks to evaluate an integrative model of threat, deprivation, and unpredictability, drawing on the Fragile Families Study. Confirmatory factor analysis of presumed multiple indicators of each construct reveals an adequate three-factor structure of adversity. Theory-based targeted predictions of the developmental sequelae of each dimension also received empirical support, with deprivation linked to health problems and cognitive ability; threat linked to aggression; and unpredictability to substance use and sexual risk-taking. These findings lend credibility to utility of the three-dimensional integrative framework of adversity. It could thus inform development of dimensional measures of risk assessment and exploration of multidimensional adversity profiles, sensitive to individual differences in lived experiences, supporting patient-centered, strength-based approaches to services.

Many of the computing systems programmed using Machine Learning are opaque: it is difficult to know why they do what they do or how they work. Explainable Artificial Intelligence aims to develop analytic techniques that render opaque computing systems transparent, but lacks a normative framework with which to evaluate these techniques’ explanatory successes. The aim of the present discussion is to develop such a framework, paying particular attention to different stakeholders’ distinct explanatory requirements. Building on an analysis of “opacity” from philosophy of science, this framework is modeled after accounts of explanation in cognitive science. The framework distinguishes between the explanation-seeking questions that are likely to be asked by different stakeholders, and specifies the general ways in which these questions should be answered so as to allow these stakeholders to perform their roles in the Machine Learning ecosystem. By applying the normative framework to recently developed techniques such as input heatmapping, feature-detector visualization, and diagnostic classification, it is possible to determine whether and to what extent techniques from Explainable Artificial Intelligence can be used to render opaque computing systems transparent and, thus, whether they can be used to solve the Black Box Problem.

I develop a model of framing contests to elucidate how cognitive frames influence organizational strategy making. By using ethnographic techniques to study the day-to-day practices of strategy making in one firm, I examine the ways actors attempted to transform their own cognitive frames of a situation into predominant frames through a series of interactions. Frames are the means by which managers make sense of ambiguous information from their environments. Actors each had cognitive frames about the direction the market was taking and about what kinds of solutions would be appropriate. Where frames about a strategic choice were not congruent, actors engaged in highly political framing practices to make their frames resonate and to mobilize action in their favor. Those actors who most skillfully engaged in these practices shaped the frame that prevailed in the organization. This framing perspective suggests that frames are not only instrumental tools for the ex post justification of actions taken through power, but rather are an ex ante part of the political process that produces decisions. Uncertainty opens up the possibility for new actors to gain power, and contesting frames is a way of changing the power structures in the organization. A principal contribution of the framing contests model is to locate a middle ground between cognitive and political models of strategy making, one in which frames are both constraints and resources and outcomes can be shaped by purposeful action and interaction to make meaning.

The realm of entrepreneurship has seen a rise in research on effectuation from the perspective of cognition, which has sparked significant discussion among academics due to a lack of well-defined theoretical foundations. However, despite this interest in cognitive theories, the grounded cognition theory has not been adequately explored to explain the behavior of entrepreneurs. Accordingly, we propose an integrative theoretical framework for the effectuation and causation models in light of an offloading process. This process helps to explain the relationship between the entrepreneur’s cognitive antecedents and their behavioral outcomes. Consequently, our study provides theoretical underpinnings for effectuation and a better understanding of how effectuation and causation models are alternatingly engaged during the entrepreneur’s decision-making process.Plain English SummaryThe entrepreneur’s behavior explained by the grounded cognition theory: how and why effectuation and causation are complementary models of decision-making? This research draws on grounded cognition theory and aims to deepen our understanding of the entrepreneurial decision-making process through the notion of “offloading.” It also discusses its behavioral consequences according to effectuation and causation models. This research theoretically explains the basis for effectuation and suggests an integrative framework for the entrepreneurial decision-making process, which is critically needed in the current body of research. By understanding the complementary nature of the two models, entrepreneurs can gain a better understanding of their own decision-making process and improve their overall practices. This research therefore strengthens entrepreneurs’ awareness of the point at which they switch from one process to another, thereby legitimizing their decision-making process, by improving representation of the entrepreneurial decision-making process. This research therefore helps us understand the business practices of entrepreneurs.

We introduce EmoAtlas, a computational library/framework extracting emotions and syntactic/semantic word associations from texts. EmoAtlas combines interpretable artificial intelligence (AI) for syntactic parsing in 18 languages and psychologically validated lexicons for detecting the eight emotions in Plutchik’s theory. We show that EmoAtlas can match or surpass transformer-based natural language processing techniques, BERT or large language models like ChatGPT 3.5 or LLaMAntino, in detecting emotions from Italian and English online posts and news articles (e.g., achieving 85.6% accuracy in detecting anger in posts vs the 68.8% value of ChatGPT and 89.9% value for BERT). EmoAtlas presents important advantages in terms of speed and absence of fine-tuning, e.g., it runs 12x faster than BERT on the same data. Testing EmoAtlas’ and easily trainable transformers’ relevance in a psychometric task like reproducing human creativity ratings for 1071 short texts, we find that EmoAtlas and BERT obtain equivalent predictive power (fourfold cross-validation, ρ ≈ 0.495, p < 10⁻⁴). Combining BERT’s semantic features with EmoAtlas’ emotional/syntactic networks of words gets substantially better at estimating creativity rates of stories (ρ = 0.628, p < 10⁻⁴). This indicates an interplay between the creativity of narratives and their semantic, emotional, and syntactic structure. Via interpretable emotional profiles and syntactic networks, EmoAtlas can also quantify how emotions are channeled through specific words in texts, e.g., how did customers frame their ideas and emotions towards ”beds” in hotel reviews? We release EmoAtlas as a standalone ”text as data” computational tool and discuss its impact in extracting interpretable and reproducible insights from texts.

PurposeThe paper aims to investigate existing research in factors impacting organic food purchase with special reference to eco-labels and identify the relative influence of various determinants.Design/methodology/approachA conceptual framework is proposed of organic food buying behaviour after analysing a sample of 154,072 consumers reported in 91 research studies from 2001–2020. The factors are categorised into four categories on the basis of relatedness. In addition, the factors were analysed based on time, region and national economic status.FindingsThe impact of consumer psychographics, socio-demographic and product-related factor categories were found to be more pronounced compared to supply-related factor category. The results show that among individual factors like health concern, environment concern, knowledge and awareness, eco-labels and price followed by trust in organic food are the most important factors in organic food purchase. The findings suggest that eco-labels increase trust in organic food by reducing information asymmetry in consumers. However, there were differences in perception and factors importance between high-income economies and emerging economies.Originality/valueThe study is unique, as it analyses secondary research based on criteria of high-income economies and emerging economies. The conceptual framework can also be incorporated further into different cognitive models like the theory of planned behaviour.

Framing research seeks to understand the forces that shape human behaviour in the policy process. It assumes that policy is a social construct and can be cast in a variety of ways to imply multiple legitimate value considerations. Frames provide the cognitive means of making sense of the social world, but discordance among them forms the basis of policy contestation. Framing, as both theory and method, has proven to generate considerable insight into the nature of policy debates in a variety of disciplines. Despite its salience for understanding health policy debates; however, little is known about the ways frames influence the health policy process. A scoping review using the Arksey and O’Malley framework was conducted. The literature on framing in the health sector was reviewed using nine health and social science databases. Articles were included that explicitly reported theory and methods used, data source(s), at least one frame, frame sponsor and evidence of a given frame’s effect on the health policy process. A total of 52 articles, from 1996 to 2014, and representing 12 countries, were identified. Much of the research came from the policy studies/political science literature (n = 17) and used a constructivist epistemology. The term ‘frame’ was used as a label to describe a variety of ideas, packaged as values, social problems, metaphors or arguments. Frames were characterized at various levels of abstraction ranging from general ideological orientations to specific policy positions. Most articles presented multiple frames and showed how actors advocated for them in a highly contested political process. Framing is increasingly an important, yet overlooked aspect of the policy process. Further analysis on frames, framing processes and frame conflict can help researchers and policymakers to understand opaque and highly charged policy issues, which may facilitate the resolution of protracted policy controversies. La investigación de enmarque busca entender las fuerzas que dan forma a la conducta humana en el proceso político. Supone que la política es una construcción social y que se puede moldear en una variedad de maneras que implican múltiples consideraciones de valores legitimas. Los marcos proporcionan los medios cognitivos para dar sentido al mundo social, pero la discordancia entre ellos forma la base de la contestación política. El enmarque, tanto de la teoría como del método, ha demostrado generar considerables conocimientos sobre la naturaleza de los debates de política en una variedad de disciplinas. A pesar de su relevancia para la comprensión de los debates sobre políticas de la salud; sin embargo, poco se sabe acerca de cómo los marcos influyen en el proceso de la política de la salud. Una revisión amplia se llevó a cabo utilizando el marco teórico de Arksey y O’Malley. La literatura sobre el enmarque en el sector de la salud fue revisada utilizando nueve bases de datos de la salud y de las ciencias sociales. Fueron incluidos los artículos que informaron explícitamente la teoría y los métodos utilizados, la (s) fuente (s) de datos, al menos un marco, marco patrocinador y evidencia del efecto de un marco determinado en el proceso de la política de la salud. Un total de 52 articulos, de 1996 a 2014, y representando 12 países, se identificaron. Gran parte de la investigación provino de la literatura de estudios de políticas/ciencia política (n = 17) y utilizó una epistemología constructivista. El término ‘marco’ se utilizó como una etiqueta para describir una variedad de ideas presentadas como valores, problemas sociales, metáforas o argumentos. Los marcos se caracterizaron en los varios niveles de abstracción que van desde las orientaciones ideológicas generales a posiciones politicas específicas. La mayoría de los artículos presentaron múltiples marcos y mostraron cómo los actores abogaron por ellos en un proceso político controvertido. El enmarque es cada vez más importante, pero aun así pasa por alto el proceso de la política. Un análisis más amplio de los marcos, los procesos de enmarque y el conflicto de marcos puede ayudar a los investigadores y a los formuladores de políticas a entender las cuestiones opacas y altamente cargadas de política, que pueden facilitar la resolución de controversias políticas prolongadas. 框架研究试图了解政策过程中塑造人类行为的力量。框架研 究假设政策是一个社会结构, 能够通过一系列途径被塑造, 这 预示着众多法律价值思考。结构提供了对社会世界意义的认 知方式, 但是认知方式的不一致成为政策冲突的基础。框架研 究在理论和方法层面形成对一系列原则中政策争论本质的重 要洞悉。尽管框架在了解医疗政策争论方面有突出的作用, 但 是我们不了解框架影响医疗政策过程的方式。我们使用 Arksey O’Malley 模型进行了一个概括性回顾。我们使用 9 个 医疗和社会科学数据库回顾了医疗领域的框架研究文献。囊 括的文章明确地阐述理论和使用方法、数据源、至少一个结 构、结构支持和医疗政策过程结构影响的案例。1996－2014 年, 代表 12 个国家, 总计52篇文章被挑选出来。其中许多研 究（n＝17）来自政策研究和政策科学文献并且使用建构主义 认识论。”框架”的概念作为标签用于描述一系列思想, 包装为 价值, 社会问题, 隐喻和争论。框架研究在从宏观概念性方向 到特定政策位置的众多抽象层次上被塑造。大多数文章代表 众多结构, 将行动者如何在存在高度质疑政策过程中拥护它们 展现出来。框架研究正在逐渐成为政策过程中重要却被忽视 的方面。针对框架、框架过程和框架冲突的进一步研究能够 帮助研究者和政策制定者了解不透明的和高估的政策问题, 或 许会促进人们解决延长的政策争论。