The ecological composition of plaintiff entities may vary in size and sociographics in toxic tort litigation. The amount of awards and the justifications for those awards in the various plaintiff situations are unknown. Consolidation which is procedurally distinct from class consolidation procedurally distinct from class action is an alternative litigation strategy for mass torts. While it is well-grounded in English common law, jury decision making in consolidated actions has not been extensively examined by social scientific, legal, or communication researchers. In light of the limited research in this area, awards and decision justifications were gathered from two populations of surrogate jurors. Subjects were asked to decide on the amount of money to award a single plaintiff or a small aggregate, small group, large aggregate or large group of plaintiffs in a written summary of a hypothetical toxic substance case. In addition, respondents were asked to explain the reason(s) for their award decisions. The average award in each situation was in the mid-point area of a range from zero to one million dollars. The amount implies that on average respondents were inclined to give all plaintiff entities approximately $500,000. The justifications for the awards were organized into the following nine categories determined by the application of Toulmin's model of argument: (1)~Company Attribution - CA; (2)~Employee Attribution - EA; (3)~Attribution to Both Employee and Company - BA; (4)~Evaluation Pro-Plaintiff - EPP; (5)~Evaluation Pro-Defendant - EPD; (6)~Sufficient Compensation - SC; (7)~Company Attribution/Sufficient Compensation - CASC; (8)~Employee Attribution/Sufficient Compensation - EASC; and (9)~Both Attribution/Sufficient Compensation - BASC. The underlying warrants(s) in the responses served as the label for each category. The classifications revealed a categorical advantage for the plaintiff(s). Respondents provided justifications beyond strict attributions of responsibility to the parties involved. Need for compensation and a positive regard for plaintiffs, for example, were issues which emerged in the justifications Attribution of responsibility to the employee was a consistent basis for monetary decisions for subjects who decided not to award any compensation. Respondents who were maximum award givers, however, deviated from attributions in the small aggregate, small group, and large aggregate situations.

No description available.

Previous research has shown that people’s judgments about who owns an object depend on the amount and type of labor involved in acquiring it. While informative about the influence of labor on the acquisition of existing objects, little is known about how ownership judgments are made for objects that are created out of non-owned materials. The current studies investigated whether people judge that creation confers ownership, and how an agent’s intent influences people’s ownership judgments. Experiment 1 revealed that people view creation as conferring ownership, but that ownership is not established when an agent’s attempt to create fails. Experiment 2 revealed that creators own objects that they create intentionally, but not objects that they create without intent. Experiment 3 revealed that people consider true creation to be the result of intentional actions, and that those responsible for true creation are granted ownership at higher rates than those viewed as only having modified an existing object. The similar pattern of responses in previous research about labor involving acquiring objects and the current research on labor involving creating objects suggests that a general notion of labor could underlie people’s ownership judgments.

Recent accounting research suggests that auditor identification or familiarity with their clients may be an additional threat to auditor independence, which may be mitigated by a strong professional identity (King 2002; Bamber and Iyer 2007). However, social identity theory suggests that a strong professional identity will only be effective if it is highly salient and thus readily activated. Yet, professional identity salience is argued to have diminished in recent years (Warren and Alzola 2009). I examine if the level of professional identity salience moderates the positive association between auditor agreement with the client and client identity strength, or the negative association between auditor agreement with the client and professional identity strength. I address these research questions using two experiments completed by experienced professional auditors. In the first experiment with an ambiguous audit judgment task, I examine client identity strength and professional identity salience at two levels each and measure professional identity strength. Results show that auditors with stronger client identities agree more with the client, but only when professional identity salience is not heightened. I do not find that auditors with stronger professional identities agree less with the client, even when professional identity salience is heightened. In the second experiment with an unambiguous audit judgment task, I examine client identity strength at two levels when professional identity salience is not heightened. Results are inconclusive as to whether auditors with strong client identities differ in their agreement with the client, relative to auditors with weak client identities. My research contributes to literature on auditor identification and independence by demonstrating the importance of professional identity salience, not just professional identity strength, on auditor judgments. I also show that threats to auditor objectivity can arise from client identity that develops even without a familiar client relationship.

Previous research has shown that people’s judgments about who owns an object depend on the amount and type of labor involved in acquiring it. While informative about the influence of labor on the acquisition of existing objects, little is known about how ownership judgments are made for objects that are created out of non-owned materials. The current studies investigated whether people judge that creation confers ownership, and how an agent’s intent influences people’s ownership judgments. Experiment 1 revealed that people view creation as conferring ownership, but that ownership is not established when an agent’s attempt to create fails. Experiment 2 revealed that creators own objects that they create intentionally, but not objects that they create without intent. Experiment 3 revealed that people consider true creation to be the result of intentional actions, and that those responsible for true creation are granted ownership at higher rates than those viewed as only having modified an existing object. The similar pattern of responses in previous research about labor involving acquiring objects and the current research on labor involving creating objects suggests that a general notion of labor could underlie people’s ownership judgments.

Moraliska bedömningar har länge ansetts komma från rationellt tänkande, men även andra aspekter har setts ha en inverkan på individers moraliska bedömningar: så som socialt samspel med vänner och föräldrar. I arbetet undersöktes det om två till synes likvärdiga situationer bedöms som moraliskt olika, där ena situationen utspelar sig i verkligheten och den andra på Internet. 276 gymnasielever med en medelålder på 17 år användes i analysen, 137 slumpades till betingelsen verklighet. Det framkom att situationen över Internet ansågs som moraliskt värre än situationen i verkligheten. Vissa inomgruppsskillnader observerades, exempelvis att färre diskussioner om moral med vänner, samt det upplevda förtrycket av kritiskt tänkande från lärare, samvarierade med åsikten att individerna agerade moraliskt bättre. Även om det framkom en skillnad i hur Internet och verklighet bedömdes moraliskt, så går det inte att utesluta om mediet Internet har en komplett likvärdighet i jämförelse med verkligheten. Vidare studier behövs för att undersöka detta.

Recent accounting research suggests that auditor identification or familiarity with their clients may be an additional threat to auditor independence, which may be mitigated by a strong professional identity (King 2002; Bamber and Iyer 2007). However, social identity theory suggests that a strong professional identity will only be effective if it is highly salient and thus readily activated. Yet, professional identity salience is argued to have diminished in recent years (Warren and Alzola 2009). I examine if the level of professional identity salience moderates the positive association between auditor agreement with the client and client identity strength, or the negative association between auditor agreement with the client and professional identity strength. I address these research questions using two experiments completed by experienced professional auditors. In the first experiment with an ambiguous audit judgment task, I examine client identity strength and professional identity salience at two levels each and measure professional identity strength. Results show that auditors with stronger client identities agree more with the client, but only when professional identity salience is not heightened. I do not find that auditors with stronger professional identities agree less with the client, even when professional identity salience is heightened. In the second experiment with an unambiguous audit judgment task, I examine client identity strength at two levels when professional identity salience is not heightened. Results are inconclusive as to whether auditors with strong client identities differ in their agreement with the client, relative to auditors with weak client identities. My research contributes to literature on auditor identification and independence by demonstrating the importance of professional identity salience, not just professional identity strength, on auditor judgments. I also show that threats to auditor objectivity can arise from client identity that develops even without a familiar client relationship.

In this thesis, we will be concerned with Kant's philosophy of beauty and with a particular area of interest which is of great importance to any practical theory of aesthetics: dispute. If one judges something to be beautiful - if one makes a judgment of taste, and we seek to persuade others to our conviction, then how can we go about doing this? We shall discover that Kant's theory provides an interesting account of how disputes over taste can take place: an account which is informative for the way in which we conduct aesthetics today.

Thesis (M.A.)--Ohio State University, 2008. / Title from first page of PDF file. Includes bibliographical references (p. 50-55).

Univ., Diss.--Paussau, 2003.