Search results

Bystander apathy has been a source of debate for decades. In the past half-century, psychologists developed theoretical frameworks to understand bystander activity, commonly referred to as bystander intervention models (BIMs). More recently, BIMs have been modified to facilitate initiatives to prevent various forms of online victimization. This chapter begins with a review of BIMs and recent applications of bystander intervention research to online environments. We also present several future directions for research along with applications for reducing technology-facilitated violence, including programming recommendations and theoretical development.

Genetic risk for depressive disorders is poorly understood despite consistent suggestions of a high heritable component. Most genetic studies have focused on risk associated with single variants, a strategy which has so far only yielded small (often non-replicable) risks for depressive disorders. In this paper we argue that more substantial risks are likely to emerge from genetic variants acting in synergy within and across larger neurobiological systems (polygenic risk factors). We show how knowledge of major integrated neurobiological systems provides a robust basis for defining and testing theoretically defensible polygenic risk factors. We do this by describing the architecture of the overall stress response. Maladaptation via impaired stress responsiveness is central to the aetiology of depression and anxiety and provides a framework for a systems biology approach to candidate gene selection. We propose principles for identifying genes and gene networks within the neurosystems involved in the stress response and for defining polygenic risk factors based on the neurobiology of stress-related behaviour. We conclude that knowledge of the neurobiology of the stress response system is likely to play a central role in future efforts to improve genetic prediction of depression and related disorders.

Opportunities to observe presidential leadership capacities and to be an active citizen in appraising presidential leadership practices have increased the relevance of perceptions of candidates’ leadership qualities in presidential and campaign politics. Based on prior evidence, the current study predicted and confirmed that a sample of 1,087 young voter perceptions of presidential candidates’ leadership practices predict intent to vote for a particular candidate after accounting for party affiliation. Additionally, party affiliation was reconfirmed as predicting differences in perceived leadership practices. Interestingly, male and female perceptions of presidential leadership practices varied and were contextualized by factors related to identity development. The study concludes with a discussion of implications as they pertain to leadership theory and leadership education.

As family and nonfamily businesses differ in how they do business, the focus of this manuscript is on understanding how strategy-level models can be misinterpreted if family involvement is not considered. Thus, in this manuscript, the focus is on understanding the extent to which strategic orientations (market orientation and technology orientation, which reflect strategic approach), strategic performance metric focus (financial-based, optimization-based and market-based, which reflect strategy evaluations) and strategic audacity (which reflects boldness in envisioning and delivering strategic outcomes) play a role in driving firm performance – in family businesses vs nonfamily businesses. Understanding how these drivers impact performance differently in family vs nonfamily businesses enables companies to better direct their strategic efforts.

After presenting theoretical concepts, authors use regression analysis on a sample of companies in a developing European Union (EU) country (n = 282) to evaluate the impact of strategic orientation, strategic performance metric focus and strategic audacity on firm performance separately in three samples: the full sample (consisting of both family and nonfamily-owned firms), sample of family businesses and the sample of nonfamily businesses.

The role of strategic orientation, strategic audacity and focal goals in driving firm performance differs depending on the company type (family vs nonfamily). In the case of nonfamily businesses, strategic audacity and technology orientation with the focus on efficiencies and markets are driving firm performance. In the case of family businesses, both market and technology orientation are important drivers of performance; the focus on financial and market indicators of performance is positively impacting performance, while the focus on efficiency indicators is diminishing the performance of family businesses. Thus, results show that of the performance drivers for family businesses, some are insignificant (strategic audacity), while some even have a negative impact (focus on optimization-based measures of performance) on family businesses' performance. Moreover, results show that some of the drivers of performance in case of family businesses (market orientation and focus on financial-based measures of performance) are not drivers of outstanding performance in the case of nonfamily businesses.

Best practices differ for family vs nonfamily businesses. In case of family businesses, comparing them to nonfamily businesses, market orientation and the focus on financial-based measures of performance have a greater impact on firm performance, while, at the same time, family businesses should refrain focusing on pursuing optimization-based measures of performance as such pursuit drives down their performance. Understanding the drivers of performance specific to family businesses will enable such firms to better navigate contexts characterized by ambiguity and uncertainty.

The manuscript evaluates how models, generally researched in the overall firm metrics, differ between family businesses and nonfamily businesses, thus delivering new insights into the important marketing concepts.