Search results

Wine consumption is declining, while cannabis use among young adults in Germany has surged. With new laws partially legalising recreational cannabis, advocates claim it could replace alcohol, offering health benefits and cost savings. However, concerns remain that cannabis might increase alcohol consumption and associated health risks. Despite recognition of both substitute and complementary relationships between cannabis and alcohol, data on the cannabis–wine relationship is scarce. This study aims to understand the motivations behind wine and cannabis consumption, segment wine drinkers by those motives, profile wine drinkers who also consume cannabis and determine whether wine and cannabis act as substitutes or complements across distinct consumer groups.

The authors conducted an online survey using random sampling and used cluster analysis to identify consumer segments based on motivations for wine consumption. Exploring various variables, including consumption motives, behavioural patterns and socio-demographics, the authors also examined cannabis consumption among wine drinkers.

This study surveyed 523 German wine drinkers aged 20–60 years, including 215 cannabis users. Four consumer segments emerged: “adaptive conformists”, “expansive strategists”, “self-conscious hedonists” and “ambivalent drinkers.” Three segments preferred wine for social and enhancing effects. “Adaptive conformists”, the group with the most cannabis users, sought negative reinforcement like conformity or coping. The “adaptive conformists” and “expansive strategists” show the tendencies of a complementary cannabis–wine relationship.

This study pioneers the use of the Marijuana Motives Measure scales, developed by Simons et al. (1998), within the motivational framework by Cox and Klinger (1988) and Cooper et al. (2015), for wine drinkers. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is also the first to categorise wine drinkers into segments based on MMM scales for both wine and cannabis and segment wine consumers using cannabis.

The purpose of this paper was to examine the two-factor theory (Herzberg et al., 1959), determining whether millennials experience similar job satisfaction and dissatisfaction with Herzberg et al.’s motivation/hygiene descriptors as they relate to job enrichment.

This paper analyzed the historical relevancy of Herzberg et al.’s controversial motivation theory to 21st-century workers. Extensive research of scholarly journal articles included historical studies and recent studies from 1919 to 2024.

In the late 1950s, Herzberg, Mausner and Snyderman identified, from two simple reflective questions to participants, 14 work factors, which vary in the degree of motivational effect across two independent continuums of satisfaction and dissatisfaction. Given the seminal work by Herzberg et al. in this area of motivation and hygiene factors, as well as subsequent contributors in the field, the authors of this study explored the role of generational motivational changes as they relate to job enrichment.

The authors offer a reassessment of the Herzberg motivation theory to account for the generational differences that might influence its practice in the current historical context. The authors laid a foundation for further inquiry into how future workplace motivational choices compare with past generations, potentially increasing performance, and higher levels of personal achievement.

The multiplicity of the late-night television offer is a recent phenomenon. In the late 1940s, TV was still in its experimental stage and programming was limited to certain hours of the day. How then did late-night evolve from one dominant program to the cornucopia that exists today? To what extent did the progressive fragmentation of the media environment contribute to this exponential growth in late-night programs? To answer these questions, this chapter will look closely at three phases of late-night history: the ascendance of The Tonight Show during the Johnny Carson era, Johnny's succession when two princes vied for his late-night throne, and then finally the latest developments where a new generation of late-night royalty, which I refer to as The House of Stewart, would emerge with a plethora of shows. Simultaneously, this chapter will also delve into the media context during each phase which became increasingly fragmented leading to an explosion of new ways of experiencing television.

This paper examines the state’s accountability to its citizens, in particular the First Peoples of settler colonial nations such as Australia, and how these responsibilities may be enacted via a process of compensatory justice in Native Title claims. We focus on the landmark Timber Creek ruling and the impacts of racialized preconceptions on the accountability outcomes of the case.

This study draws on critical race theory to reveal embedded racialised perspectives that perpetuate exclusion and discriminatory outcomes. Court documents including hearing transcripts, case judgements, witness statements, appellant and respondent submissions, expert reports and responses from First Nations leaders, form the basis of our analysis.

The case highlights how the compensation awarded to Native Title holders was based on racialised assumptions that prioritised neoliberal values, commercial activities and reaching a “socially acceptable” judgement over valuing Aboriginal uses of land. A critical analysis of court documents reveals the pervasiveness of presumed “objectivity” in the use of accounting tools to calculate economic value and the accountability implications of a process based on litigation, not negotiation. These findings reveal the hiding places offered by calculative practices that equate neoliberal priorities with accountability and reaffirm the importance of alternative accountings to resist inequitable distributive outcomes.

Novel insights, drawing on First Nations peoples’ connections to land and their perspectives on accountability and justice, are offered in this study. Our analysis of Native Title holders’ submissions to the courts alongside historical and anthropological sources leads to the conclusion that compensation decisions regarding Native Title land must be approached from the perspective of Aboriginal landowners if accountable outcomes are to be achieved.