Search results

The development and application of critical thinking skills are an important component of success at University. Such skills permit students to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of evidence, argument and theory. However research suggests that many students believe in paranormal phenomena (e.g. telekinesis). Such beliefs defy the basic principles of science and do not stand up to critical scrutiny. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

This study aimed to investigate paranormal beliefs within a student population: differences among gender, academic discipline and academic performance were explored.

Findings indicated that females expressed higher levels of paranormal belief than males, “hard” science students (e.g. Biology) and “soft” science students (e.g. Sociology) expressed lower levels of belief than arts students, and a significant negative correlation indicated that high achievers were less likely to endorse paranormal beliefs.

In light of these results the authors suggest that paranormal phenomena may be a useful tool for teaching critical thinking skills at university.

This research provides accounting-ethics authors and administrators with a benchmark for accounting-ethics research. While Bernardi and Bean (2010) considered publications in business-ethics and accounting’s top-40 journals this study considers research in eight accounting-ethics and public-interest journals, as well as, 34 business-ethics journals. We analyzed the contents of our 42 journals for the 25-year period between 1991 through 2015. This research documents the continued growth (Bernardi & Bean, 2007) of accounting-ethics research in both accounting-ethics and business-ethics journals. We provide data on the top-10 ethics authors in each doctoral year group, the top-50 ethics authors over the most recent 10, 20, and 25 years, and a distribution among ethics scholars for these periods. For the 25-year timeframe, our data indicate that only 665 (274) of the 5,125 accounting PhDs/DBAs (13.0% and 5.4% respectively) in Canada and the United States had authored or co-authored one (more than one) ethics article.

In the last four years, since Volume I of this Bibliography first appeared, there has been an explosion of literature in all the main functional areas of business. This wealth of material poses problems for the researcher in management studies — and, of course, for the librarian: uncovering what has been written in any one area is not an easy task. This volume aims to help the librarian and the researcher overcome some of the immediate problems of identification of material. It is an annotated bibliography of management, drawing on the wide variety of literature produced by MCB University Press. Over the last four years, MCB University Press has produced an extensive range of books and serial publications covering most of the established and many of the developing areas of management. This volume, in conjunction with Volume I, provides a guide to all the material published so far.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

Index by subjects, compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

Professional touching behavior (PTB), defined as intentional touching behavior that occurs between organizational members and that falls within the boundaries of appropriateness and professionalism in the workplace, is prevalent in organizations. Scholars from multiple disciplines, including human resources researchers, have acknowledged the importance of physical contact for facilitating interpersonal communication and relationship-building. However, PTB may not only elicit positive reactions from those who receive it but also negative reactions as well, with implications for social dynamics in organizations. PTB can, on the one hand, fulfill employees’ desires for interpersonal connection; at the same time, such physical contact at work can represent a threat to employees’ health. To explain the nature and implications of these divergent effects of receiving PTB, the authors draw upon sociometer theory and behavioral immune system (BIS) theory to model the emotional, cognitive, and physiological processes via which, and the conditions under which, receiving such behavior will result in socially functional responses and prompt subsequent prosocial behavior, and when PTB will be perceived as a health risk and prompt withdrawal behavior. The theoretical framework of this chapter expands our conceptual understanding of the consequences of interpersonal physical contact at work and has important human resources management (HRM) implications for organizational managers.

The existence of the weekend effect has been reported from the 1950s to 1970s in the US stock markets. Recently, Robins and Smith (2016, Critical Finance Review, 5: 417-424) have argued that the weekend effect has disappeared after 1975. Using data on the market portfolio, they document existence of structural break before 1975 and absence of any weekend effects after that date. The purpose of this study is to contribute some new empirical evidences on the weekend effect for the industry-style portfolios in the US stock market using data over 90 years.

The authors re-examine persistence or reversal of the weekend effect in the industry portfolios consisting of The New York Stock Exchange (NYSE), The American Stock Exchange (AMEX) and The National Association of Securities Dealers Automated Quotations exchange (NASDAQ) stocks using daily returns from 1926 to 2017. Our results confirm varying dates for structural breaks across industrial portfolios.

As for the existence of weekend effects, the authors get mixed results for different portfolios. However, the overall findings provide broad support for the absence of weekend effects in most of the industrial portfolios as reported in Robins and Smith (2016). In addition, structural breaks for other weekdays and days of the week effects for other days have also been documented in the paper.

As far as the authors are aware, this paper is the first research that analyzes weekend effect for the industry-style portfolios in the US stock market using data over 90 years.