No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

The United States Centennial was a pivotal event to celebrate the founding of the American nation. People came together to show the unity and progress of the United States, specifically after the division of the Civil War. As the industrial revolution took off in earnest, Americans were keen to show the world that they were united and taking the lead in industrial change. Further, to show that the United States was a force in the world, other nations were invited to participate by displaying their culture at the event. The Women’s Centennial Executive Committee (WCEC) became part of the effort to raise funds early on in the process. A group of thirteen women joined together with Benjamin Franklin’s great-granddaughter selected as their president and they set forth to raise funds and gain publicity for a “Woman’s Section” in the main building. When that prospect was denied them, the women then began to again raise monies, but this time for their own Women’s Pavilion. Determined not to be cut out of the exhibition, the women labored tirelessly to make their ideas reality. To raise funds and to draw attention to women’s contributions to society, the women drew upon the females of the founding generation to gain legitimacy in their efforts as women active in the civic sector. Harkening back to the American Revolution, the WCEC inserted women as active participants in the founding of the nation and they used images of Martha Washington and Sarah Franklin Bache to raise funds and bolster their cause. Women, who had sacrificed as men had for the birth of the nation, were noble members of the republic; in presenting women’s labors and inventions in 1876, the WCEC was making the point that women’s lives and contributions in nineteenth century America were as vital and necessary as they had been in the eighteenth century. The rewriting of the narrative of the American Revolution enabled the WCEC to celebrate women’s accomplishments in the most public manner and to herald their achievement in both domestic production as well as in terms of education and employment. The women of 1876 formed a continuous line backwards to the Revolution, and they showed the world that American women had always been a vital part of the country and that, if afforded their rights, they would continue to do so into the future. / History

Background and Objectives: Sharing of interim results by the Data Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB) with non-DSMB members is an important issue that can affect trial integrity. The objective of this dissertation was to determine the views of the stakeholders on what kind of interim results can or should be shared by the DSMB, why, and with whom among those responsible for the conduct of a trial. Methods: We first conducted a systematic search of the literature to assess views and current evidence on sharing interim results. Secondly, we conducted two cross-sectional surveys aimed at those involved in trials to solicit their views on what type of interim results should be shared by the DSMB with non-DSMB members, with whom and under what circumstances. Thirdly, we assessed for any potential association of demographic factors with the sharing of certain interim results and their perceived usefulness, using regression analysis. Results: Mixed views exist in the literature on interim result sharing practices. Evidence from the surveys conducted resulted in the following findings. What to share: Based upon the survey results from our cross-sectional survey (Chapter 4), the interim control event rate (IControlER), the adaptive conditional power (ACP) and the unconditional conditional power (UCP) should not be shared. Most respondents from this survey thought the interim combined event rate (ICombinedER) could be shared provided proper conditions and provisions are in place. However, based on our cross-sectional scenario-based survey (Chapter 3), it was demonstrated that the ICombinedER, when shared at interim, is compatible with three possible interim results (Drug X doing better than placebo, worse than placebo or performing the same as placebo). Why share or not share: Respondents indicate that the ICombinedER can be shared because it does not unmask relative effects between groups, and keeps the steering committee (SC) informed about the trial’s progress; however, with the condition that sharing this type of result should be specified a priori including for what purpose and be at the DSMB’s discretion, especially if the control group rate is known from the literature. However, it is important to note that the ICombinedER, demonstrated with evidence from our cross-sectional scenario-based survey (Chapter 3), is compatible with three possible interim results and should not be shared because it has low usefulness and is flawed due to multiple interpretations. The IControlER and the ACP should not be shared because they are unmasking of interim results. It was mentioned that ICombinedER is usually known by the SC and sponsor making it easy to determine group rates if the IControlER is known. The UCP should not be shared because it is a technical measure that is potentially misleading of interim results. With whom to share: Survey results from Chapter 4 indicated that the ICombinedER can be shared with the SC and that the IControlER, the ACP, and the UCP should not be shared with any non-DSMB members by the DSMB. However, evidence from Chapter 3 also indicates that the ICombinedER should not be shared with any non-DSMB member. Factors associated with sharing: Having experience with greater than 15 trials with private industry sponsorship was found to be associated with not sharing the IControlER and an increase in perceived usefulness in sharing the ACP. Though some other demographic factors were found to be associated with sharing the ICombinedER and the UCP, they were sensitive to missing data upon our sensitivity analysis and will require more validation. Conclusions: Though mixed views exist within an extensive literature review on interim result sharing practices, survey evidence from this dissertation suggests that the ICombinedER, IControlER, the ACP and the UCP should not be shared with any non-DSMB member. The IControlER and ACP can be unmasking of interim results and the UCP is a technical measure that is potentially misleading. We agree with this reasoning. The majority of respondents from the survey in Chapter 4 indicated that the ICombinedER can be shared with the SC because it does not unmask relative effects between groups, however it was also stipulated that sharing this measure should be specified a priori and for what purpose and be at the DSMB’s discretion, especially if the control group rate is known from the literature. Even though the majority from our second survey in Chapter 4 indicate sharing the ICombinedER with the SC, we do not recommend sharing the ICombinedER at interim with any non-DSMB member because, as demonstrated with evidence from our cross-sectional scenario-based survey in Chapter 3, this measure is compatible with three possible interim results potentially leading to the introduction of trial bias at interim by those privy this interim measure and their interpretation. Based on the findings from the survey from Chapter 4, there appears to be a lack of awareness in how sharing the ICombinedER is flawed, of low usefulness, and potentially dangerous. The perceived desire to have this measure shared seems misguided. Experience with greater than 15 trials with private industry sponsorship was found to be associated with not endorsing the sharing the IControlER and an increase in perceived usefulness in sharing the ACP by the DSMB at interim. In regards to implications for future research, this characteristic should be further evaluated to see if this subgroup has insight into interim trial management practices that protect from trial bias. Results from this research have implications for practice and guidelines concerning trial design and protocols, and DSMB charters. These results can also help assess the need for proper safeguards around sharing an interim result when deemed appropriate by the DSMB and under their discretion, that prevent the introduction of bias that could alter the final trial results generated. / Thesis / Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

The purpose of this study is to examine American perceptions of Russia as a problem between 2001 and 2021, specifically the perceptions present in the United States Senate Foreign Relations Committee (SFRC). It tries to answer two questions: 1) how the perceptions have developed, and the perceived reasons driving this development, and 2) the differences between Republican and Democratic senators. This is done with a qualitative content analysis of the seven hearings for United States Secretary of State held between 2001, in the beginning of George W. Bush’s presidency, to 2021, the beginning of Joe Biden’s presidency. The study makes use of actor-specific theory and Kaplowitz’ theory on the perception of enemies as its theoretical framework. The result of the study is that the perception has developed from a cautious view of a Russia that is unstable, but not hostile, to one of Russia as actively hostile and problematic. The question of party differences indicates that there are few differences between the two parties other than their view on Donald Trump and his connections to Russia, although this finding is not as conclusive.

Corporate managers often pursue voluntary non-GAAP reporting when mandatory reporting is limited, although regulators are concerned with how this reporting is utilized. While the level of flexibility external auditors exhibit during discussions over subjective GAAP reporting choices can influence management's GAAP reporting decisions, it is important to determine if this behavior affects subsequent non-GAAP reporting decisions. Additionally, recent calls for increased audit committee questioning of non-GAAP disclosures may also cause audit committees to influence non-GAAP reporting. In this dissertation, I conduct an experiment to examine how auditor flexibility and audit committee questioning influence non-GAAP preparation and earnings release disclosure choices of senior executives. I predict less flexible auditor behavior will enhance managers' psychological feeling of constraint, while audit committee questioning focused on non-GAAP measures can increase managers' self-assessment of reporting decisions, both of which will translate into more conservative non-GAAP reporting. However, given prior research indicating that corporate governance mechanisms can combine in complex ways, I predict a greater impact of audit committee questioning absent auditor constraint. Results indicate managers make less conservative non-GAAP preparation decisions and disclose more non-GAAP measures in the absence of constraint from inflexible auditors. However, absent this constraint, managers make more conservative non-GAAP preparation choices and present non-GAAP measures less prominently in earnings press releases when the audit committee questions non-GAAP disclosures. These results are driven by a thorough self-assessment of reporting decisions by managers expecting audit committee questioning. This study provides evidence on how external auditors and audit committees influence various voluntary reporting decisions. / Doctor of Philosophy / Corporate managers can report their company's financial information to investors and other stakeholders in various ways. Some financial information is required to be reported in accordance with a set of formal accounting standards called United States Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). Beyond this mandatory reporting, other financial information is disclosed voluntarily when company management believes this extra information is beneficial to investors. These voluntary disclosures— called non-GAAP measures— do not follow a set of accounting standards and can be disclosed with more discretion by company management than GAAP measures. The variation in how non-GAAP measures are prepared and disclosed concerns regulators, such as the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Mandatory GAAP financial reporting is overseen by external auditors from public accounting firms, but auditors typically have very little formal oversight over non-GAAP reporting. Although company management ultimately decides how to disclose GAAP information, external auditors influence these reporting decisions by recommending choices during discussions over subjective GAAP issues. Sometimes auditors exhibit inflexible behavior during these discussions by being unwilling to consider management's reporting choices. This inflexibility limits or constrains the GAAP reporting choices of managers. However, prior research has not studied how this constraint impacts how managers make non-GAAP reporting choices. Further, GAAP reporting choices can also be influenced by the audit committee, which is a subgroup of members of the board of directors that is in charge of overseeing financial reporting and disclosure. Recent calls from regulators have asked for increased audit committee questioning of non-GAAP disclosures, which may also cause audit committees to influence non-GAAP reporting. Non-GAAP measures are often presented in earnings press releases, which are public announcements by a company that disclose information regarding results of operations or financial condition for a given period. Managers can make strategic decisions regarding the preparation of non-GAAP measures and the presentation of this information in earnings releases, both of which can influence investors' decision-making. In this dissertation, I conduct an experiment utilizing senior executives to examine how auditor flexibility and audit committee questioning influence these two types of non-GAAP reporting decisions: how to prepare non-GAAP measures and how to disclose them in earnings press releases. I predict less flexible auditor behavior will enhance managers' psychological feeling of constraint, while audit committee questioning focused on non-GAAP measures will increase managers' self-assessment of reporting decisions, both of which will translate into more conservative non-GAAP reporting. However, prior research indicates that corporate governance mechanisms, which are factors intended to help direct and monitor company management (such as auditors and audit committees), can combine in complex ways. Therefore, I predict a greater impact of audit committee questioning absent auditor constraint. The results indicate managers make less conservative non-GAAP preparation decisions (i.e. are more likely to calculate non-GAAP earnings figures that deviate from their GAAP counterparts) and disclose more non-GAAP measures in the absence of constraint from inflexible auditors. However, absent this constraint, managers make more conservative non-GAAP preparation choices and present non-GAAP measures less prominently in earnings press releases when the audit committee questions non-GAAP disclosures. These results are driven by a thorough self-assessment of reporting decisions by managers expecting audit committee questioning. This study provides evidence on how external auditors and audit committees influence various voluntary reporting decisions. Given the ubiquity of non-GAAP reporting in recent years, this dissertation can provide valuable insights to regulators, investors, and other stakeholders on factors that influence managerial decision-making related to non-GAAP disclosures.

In 1953 President Dwight D. Eisenhower charged an ad hoc advisory group with assessing the current U.S. Cold War effort and offering recommendations for an 'unified and dynamic' way forward. This work investigates the case of Eisenhower's Presidential Committee on International Information Activities and its role in the United States' approach to the Cold War. Problematizing that which is often taken for granted, this empirical, interpretive study uncovers the discursive conditions of possibility for and the discursive activities taking place within Jackson Committee decision making processes. Employing a constructivist discursive framework, this project builds on an understanding of policy making as a process of argumentation in which actors intersubjectively define problems and delimit policy and strategy options. Revealing discursive conditions of possibility enables a deeper understanding of the substance, tensions and discursive maneuvers informing subsequent U.S. strategy and policy choices during the Cold War and may offer insights into understanding and addressing geopolitical challenges in the 21st century. The thick analytic narrative illuminates the 'witcraft' involved in conceptualizing the unique threat posed by the Soviet Union whose practices challenged existing categories, and in extending wartime discourses to the post-war geopolitical environment. It examines discursive practices informing the nascent concepts of national strategy, psychological warfare, and political warfare, including arguments for constituent elements and relationships between them. In so doing, this dissertation conceptualizes national strategy as practices underpinning a prioritized drive for competitive advantage over adversaries. Additionally, political warfare represents practices intended to create and present alternatives to foreign actors that are in the U.S. interest through the integration and coordination of diplomatic, economic, military, and informational activities. Based on its conceptualization of a long-term adversarial competition with the Soviet Union, the committee recommended solutions for a sustainable national strategy of political warfare prioritizing the free world and liberal world order. Its recommendations sought to recast strategic panic into strategic patience. / Ph. D.

Yes / This study investigates the associations between audit committee characteristics and the likelihood of auditors' going-concern decisions among UK failed firms. Specifically, we examine whether the threat posed by auditor-provided non-audit services (NAS) to auditors' reporting decisions is mediated by audit committee characteristics. We find that failed firms with higher proportions of independent non-executive directors (NEDs) and financial experts on the audit committee are more likely to receive auditor going-concern modifications prior to failure, but that there is no significant relationship between NAS fees and the likelihood of receiving a going-concern modification. The evidence further suggests that the association between NAS and auditors' reporting decisions is subject to audit committee characteristics. Where the audit committee is more independent and includes a greater proportion of financial experts, auditors providing the client with NAS are less likely to issue a standard unmodified going-concern report prior to failure. Overall, the findings provide support for corporate governance regulators' concerns about the monitoring benefits of audit committee independence and the presence of financial expertise on the audit committee for auditors' reporting decisions.