Global ETD Search

51	KOGNITIV PROBLEMLÖSNING UNDER STRESS : PÅVERKAR FYSIOLOGISK AROUSAL PRESTATIONEN? Simonsson-Sarnecki, David January 2010 (has links) Förmågan att prestera under akut eller kraftig stress är en förutsättning för en del yrken. Forskningsresultaten gällande hur stress påverkar prestation pekar åt olika håll. Denna studie undersökte sambandet mellan fysiologisk arousal och kognitiv problemlösningsförmåga under stress. Trettiotvå polisstudenter testades på Ravens test av flytande intelligens APM set II både före och efter att antingen ha sprungit i tjugo minuter eller haft en självskyddslektion på ca fyrtio minuter. Resultaten från en mixed ANOVA för beroende mätningar visade på en signifikant interaktionseffekt (F (30) = 6,547, p < 0,05) – en ökning i prestationen hos självskyddsgruppen med arton procent och en minskning med femton procent hos löpningsgruppen. En möjlig förklaring till skillnaden i prestation kan vara att självskyddsträningen ger upphov till en annorlunda mental och kognitiv aktivering än löpningen. Graden av arousal kunde vidare inte förklara skillnaderna mellan grupperna och begreppets användbarhet i detta sammanhang kan kanske ifrågasättas. stress performance peak performance arousal physiological arousal APM Advanced Progressive Matrices cognitive ability police time pressure running self-defence IQ liquid intelligence cognitive pre-activation mental load cognitive load psyched-up stress prestation optimal prestation fysisk ansträngning APM Advanced Progressive Matrices kognitiv problemlösning tidspress polis löpning självskydd IQ flytande intelligens kognitivföraktivering kognitivbelastning mentalbelastning taggning Psychology Psykologi Applied psychology Tillämpad psykologi Cognitive science Kognitionsforskning
52	Killing in defence of property : a legal comparative study Awa, Linus Tambu 19 August 2016 (has links) This research examines the legal issues surrounding killing in defence of property in three selected jurisdictions: South Africa, Cameroon and the United States. The comparative analysis illustrates that although the right to protect one’s property is universal, this defence is interpreted differently in the various jurisdictions. Another issue considered in the study is the constitutional right to life in each jurisdiction and whether or not an unlawful attack against one’s property creates a legal entitlement for the attacked party to take the life of another in defence of his or her property. Private defence of property is available when a person uses force to defend an interest in property, for example; to prevent a would-be thief from taking his own, or another’s property, to prevent someone from damaging his own or another’s property, to prevent an intruder from entering his own or another’s property. When an accused pleads private defence, his claim is that his harm-causing conduct was, in the circumstances, lawful. The reasonable use of force (short of deadly force) in the private defence of property is not disputed. However, the use of deadly force in protection of property is controversial, especially in a constitutional state such as South Africa where life should be prized above property. One should however also consider that there is a close link between the private defence of defending life and of protecting property. In many cases, an assault on property also involves a threat on life. However, there are cases of private defence of property where no threat to bodily integrity exists. These situations will be examined in all three jurisdictions and measured against the various constitutional imperatives. Conclusions and recommendations are made as regards the legal framework on the defence of property in the criminal law of the various jurisdictions. / Criminal and Procedural Law / LL. M. Private defence of property Self-defence Lethal force Right to life 345.4 Self-defense (Law) -- South Africa Self-defense (Law) -- United States Self-defense (Law) -- Cameroon Right of life -- South Africa Right of life -- United States Right of life -- Cameroon Right of property -- South Africa Right of property -- United States Right of property -- Cameroon Criminal law -- South Africa Criminal law -- United States Criminal law -- Cameroon
53	L'énergie nucléaire et le droit international public / Nuclear energy and public international law El Jadie, Amna 29 June 2017 (has links) Tous les États sans discrimination ont un droit inaliénable de développer les utilisations de l'énergie nucléaire à des fins civiles, à condition de ne pas détourner ces utilisations pacifiques vers des armes nucléaires. Cependant, il est accordé à cinq pays le droit de posséder ces armes, à savoir les États-Unis, la France, la Russie, la Chine et le Royaume-Uni. Autour de cette position, un vif débat à la fois juridique et éthique a été soulevé. En effet, pour ses opposants, le nucléaire représente un risque durable et non maîtrisable par la science. Les accidents nucléaires majeurs, les déchets radioactifs et le détournement du nucléaire à des fins militaires sont des risques ingérables et d‟une gravité exceptionnelle. En revanche, les défenseurs de cette énergie la présentent comme sûre, voire partie prenante du développement durable. Selon eux, le nucléaire est un moyen fiable de lutter contre le réchauffement climatique et aussi une solution à la pénurie énergétique à laquelle le monde est confronté. En examinant et analysant la fiabilité et la crédibilité de tous les arguments allant à l‟encontre et en faveur de cette industrie, on constate que la licéité et la légitimité du recours à l'énergie nucléaire sont mal fondées. Par conséquent, nous estimons qu‟il est nécessaire de dépasser le nucléaire par la conclusion d'une convention internationale posant l'interdiction progressive mais complète du nucléaire. / All states without discrimination have an inalienable right to develop the uses of nuclear energy for civilian purposes, provided they do not divert these peaceful uses to nuclear weapons. However, five states have been granted the right to possess these weapons, that is : United-States, France, Russia, China and United-Kingdom. Around this position a fierce debate, both legal and ethical, has been raised. Indeed for its opponents nuclear represents a persistent risk that is non controllable by science. Major nuclear accidents, radioactive wastes and the use of nuclear for military purposes are unmanageable risks of exceptionnal serious gravity. On the other hand, the proponents of this energy present it as safe, even as part of sustainable development. According to them, nuclear is a reliable means to fight global warming and is also a solution to the energy shortage the world is facing. When analyzing the reliability and the credibility of all arguments for and against this industry, it can be noticed that the lawfulness and legitimacy of the use of nuclear energy are ill-founded. Therefore, we believe there is a need to go beyond nuclear with the conclusion of an international convention dealing with the progressive but comprehensive nuclear ban. Énergie nucléaire Licéité Légitimité Paix et sécurité internationales Détournement nucléaire Accident nucléaire majeur Déchets radioactifs Gestion des risques Sûreté nucléaire Responsabilité internationale Droit de légitime défense Droits de l‟homme Droit humanitaire Droit international de l'environnement Droits des générations futures Développement durable Crime contre l'humanité Énergies renouvelables Secret nucléaire Nuclear energy Lawfulness Legitimacy International peace and security Civil and military uses of nuclear Diversion of nuclear Major nuclear accident Radioactive wastes Risk management Nuclear safety International responsibility Right to self-Defence Human rights Humanitarian law International environmental law Rights of future generations Sustainable development Crime against humanity Renewable energies Nuclear secrecy Comprehensive nuclear ban convention

Page generated in 0.0555 seconds