The objective of this thesis is to examine random effect models applied to binary data. I will use classical and Bayesian inference to fit generalized linear mixed models to a specific data set. The data analyzed in this thesis comes from a study examining the injection practices of needle exchange clientele in Victoria, B.C. focusing on their risk networks. First, I will examine the application of social network analysis to the study of injection drug use, focusing on issues of gender, norms, and the problem of hidden populations. Next the focus will be on random effect models, where I will provide some background and a few examples pertaining to generalized linear mixed models (GLMMs). After GLMMs, I will discuss the nature of the injection drug use study and the data which will then be analyzed using a GLMM. Lastly, I will provide a discussion about my results of the GLMM analysis along with a summary of the injection practices of the needle exchange clientele. / Graduate / 0463

This report describes a study of how educationalists, from one preschool group, approach to and respond to children ́s creative activity in preschool. To answer the survey ́s purpose I used four research questions, which is the following: -What function do the educationalists give the creative activity in the working? -How do they see the importance of thecreative activity for thechild and its development? -How doeducationalists considerthat theyrespond to the child's creative activity? -Is thereany norms surrounding creative activity in preschool? The theoretical base of the study is rooted in the sociocultural perspective, where creative activity and visual arts can be seen as mediating cultural tools. The method is a qualitative interview of five preschooleducationalists. The conclusion is that these educationalists works with creative activity in aconsciousway, as they for instance seize the communicative function which takes place in the creative activity and visual arts. They use this function to create conditions for children ́s development and learning. They also see the function of processing expressions, and the link to play and imagination. In their work with creative activity they seem to have an agreement about the process as a central part, while it in contrast to this seems like the children is mostly focusing at the motive. The creative activity also seemsto be tightly linked to culture, in several ways, both societal and local. And the experience from home seems to be important. The conclusion also shows that the creative activity in preschool really is surrounded by norms. Which shows up to depend on, for instance, children ́s gender. But the norms also showto differ between adults and children, where they lean in different directions regarding to intentions and taste.

There’s a widespread conviction in the norms of assertion literature that an agent’s asserting something false merits criticism. As Williamson puts it, asserting something false is likened to cheating at the game of assertion. Most writers on the topic have consequently proposed factive norms of assertion – ones on which truth is a necessary condition for the proper performance of an assertion. However, I argue that this view is mistaken. I suggest that we can illuminate the error by introducing a theoretical distinction between the norm of a practice and its goal. In light of this distinction, we can see that proponents of factive norms tend to mistake the goal of a practice for the norm. In making my case, I present an analogy between the norms and goals of placing wagers and the norms and goals of assertion. One may place a bet and lose without being subject to criticism, while one may win and be worthy of criticism. Whether one wins or loses is irrelevant to the normative evaluation of a bet. What is relevant is whether the bet maximizes the bettor's expected value, which is a function of what might be lost, what might be gained, and how likely those prospects are, given the bettor's evidence. Similarly, I argue, whether one's assertion is true or false is not strictly relevant to the normative evaluation of an assertion. What is relevant is whether the speaker has adequate supporting reasons for the assertion, and that the necessary conventional and pragmatic features are present. However, context will determine what count as supportive reasons for a given proposition, what counts as relevant, and what count as conventional and pragmatic elements possessing that relevance. My proposed norm, the Supportive Reasons Norm, is thus sensitive to the context of assertion and shifts from context to context.

Capturing and sharing individual and organisational knowledge is vital for organisational functioning. Knowledge management systems (KMS) are information technology systems which enable employees to electronically capture and distribute knowledge across the organisation. Because knowledge sharing is often a discretionary behaviour requiring time and energy on behalf of employees, the success of KMS largely relies on their motivation and willingness to share. KMS implemented within organisations have been largely ineffective with failure rates of 80% documented in the knowledge management literature. There is a need for further understanding of the barriers and facilitators for employee contributions to KMS. In particular, there is a dearth of empirical research examining the role of social and organisational factors in knowledge sharing on KMS. To this end, a programme of research was developed which utilised normative and social exchange perspectives to explain employee knowledge sharing on KMS. A combination of research methodologies were employed across five field-based studies. The aim of Study 1 was to identify the determinants of knowledge sharing on KMS. In Study 1, qualitative data were collected through 16 in-depth interviews with employees from a medium-sized private sector organisation. While several barriers and facilitators were identified, the most prevalent themes to emerge from the content analysis were perceived benefits and management support, highlighting the central role of social exchange and normative processes in explaining employee knowledge sharing on KMS. The results of Study 1 were used in conjunction with previous research to design the subsequent quantitative studies. Study 2 examined the mediating role of perceived benefits in the management support – knowledge sharing intentions relationship. It used a cross-sectional survey design and sampled 41 employees from a large private sector organisation. Three main findings emerged. First, management support was positively related to employees’ knowledge sharing intentions. Second, perceived benefits were positively related to employees’ knowledge sharing intentions. Third, perceived individual benefits mediated the relationship between management support and knowledge sharing intentions. Study 3 examined the moderating role of perceived organisational support (POS) in the management support – knowledge sharing intentions relationship. Study 2 and 3 were both quantitative studies taken from the same organisational setting but with different user groups. In Study 2, the users directly contributed their knowledge onto the system. In Study 3 (N = 45), the users shared their knowledge through an intermediary person. Study 3 further extended Study 2 by investigating knowledge sharing behaviour (N = 27) in addition to knowledge sharing intentions. Study 3 had three key findings. First, consistent with Study 2, management support was positively related to employees’ knowledge sharing intentions. Second, POS was positively related to employees’ knowledge sharing intentions and knowledge sharing behaviour. Third, POS moderated the relationship between management support and knowledge sharing behaviour. Study 4 replicated and extended the findings of the previous studies in a different organisational setting. Two separate studies were conducted in a medium-sized public sector organisation. In Study 4a (N = 295) data were collected at a single point in time. Study 4b (N = 246) extended the previous quantitative studies by examining two forms of management support for the KMS as well as collecting self-reported behavioural data (N= 130) at a second time period. Overall, the findings of these studies provided mixed support for the predictions. First, system-related management support, organisational identification, perceived individual benefit and perceived organisational benefit were directly related to employee knowledge sharing on KMS. However, contrary to prediction, POS was not found to be directly related to employee knowledge sharing across the two studies. Second, organisational identification was found to moderate the relationship between management support and knowledge sharing in Study 4a but not 4b. Third, POS moderated the relationship between management support and knowledge sharing in Study 4b, however, no such relationship was found in Study 4a. Finally, across the two studies, both perceived individual and organisational benefit were found to uniquely mediate the relationship between management support and knowledge sharing intentions. On the basis of the findings of the research programme, several conclusions were made. First, system-related support from management is an important determinant of employee knowledge sharing on KMS. Second, employees’ perception of the benefits derived from knowledge sharing has an important influence on their contributions to KMS. Third, the extent to which employees identify with the organisation influences their decision to share knowledge on KMS. Fourth, the extent to which employees perceive support from the organisation influences their decision to share knowledge on KMS.

Capturing and sharing individual and organisational knowledge is vital for organisational functioning. Knowledge management systems (KMS) are information technology systems which enable employees to electronically capture and distribute knowledge across the organisation. Because knowledge sharing is often a discretionary behaviour requiring time and energy on behalf of employees, the success of KMS largely relies on their motivation and willingness to share. KMS implemented within organisations have been largely ineffective with failure rates of 80% documented in the knowledge management literature. There is a need for further understanding of the barriers and facilitators for employee contributions to KMS. In particular, there is a dearth of empirical research examining the role of social and organisational factors in knowledge sharing on KMS. To this end, a programme of research was developed which utilised normative and social exchange perspectives to explain employee knowledge sharing on KMS. A combination of research methodologies were employed across five field-based studies. The aim of Study 1 was to identify the determinants of knowledge sharing on KMS. In Study 1, qualitative data were collected through 16 in-depth interviews with employees from a medium-sized private sector organisation. While several barriers and facilitators were identified, the most prevalent themes to emerge from the content analysis were perceived benefits and management support, highlighting the central role of social exchange and normative processes in explaining employee knowledge sharing on KMS. The results of Study 1 were used in conjunction with previous research to design the subsequent quantitative studies. Study 2 examined the mediating role of perceived benefits in the management support – knowledge sharing intentions relationship. It used a cross-sectional survey design and sampled 41 employees from a large private sector organisation. Three main findings emerged. First, management support was positively related to employees’ knowledge sharing intentions. Second, perceived benefits were positively related to employees’ knowledge sharing intentions. Third, perceived individual benefits mediated the relationship between management support and knowledge sharing intentions. Study 3 examined the moderating role of perceived organisational support (POS) in the management support – knowledge sharing intentions relationship. Study 2 and 3 were both quantitative studies taken from the same organisational setting but with different user groups. In Study 2, the users directly contributed their knowledge onto the system. In Study 3 (N = 45), the users shared their knowledge through an intermediary person. Study 3 further extended Study 2 by investigating knowledge sharing behaviour (N = 27) in addition to knowledge sharing intentions. Study 3 had three key findings. First, consistent with Study 2, management support was positively related to employees’ knowledge sharing intentions. Second, POS was positively related to employees’ knowledge sharing intentions and knowledge sharing behaviour. Third, POS moderated the relationship between management support and knowledge sharing behaviour. Study 4 replicated and extended the findings of the previous studies in a different organisational setting. Two separate studies were conducted in a medium-sized public sector organisation. In Study 4a (N = 295) data were collected at a single point in time. Study 4b (N = 246) extended the previous quantitative studies by examining two forms of management support for the KMS as well as collecting self-reported behavioural data (N= 130) at a second time period. Overall, the findings of these studies provided mixed support for the predictions. First, system-related management support, organisational identification, perceived individual benefit and perceived organisational benefit were directly related to employee knowledge sharing on KMS. However, contrary to prediction, POS was not found to be directly related to employee knowledge sharing across the two studies. Second, organisational identification was found to moderate the relationship between management support and knowledge sharing in Study 4a but not 4b. Third, POS moderated the relationship between management support and knowledge sharing in Study 4b, however, no such relationship was found in Study 4a. Finally, across the two studies, both perceived individual and organisational benefit were found to uniquely mediate the relationship between management support and knowledge sharing intentions. On the basis of the findings of the research programme, several conclusions were made. First, system-related support from management is an important determinant of employee knowledge sharing on KMS. Second, employees’ perception of the benefits derived from knowledge sharing has an important influence on their contributions to KMS. Third, the extent to which employees identify with the organisation influences their decision to share knowledge on KMS. Fourth, the extent to which employees perceive support from the organisation influences their decision to share knowledge on KMS.

Capturing and sharing individual and organisational knowledge is vital for organisational functioning. Knowledge management systems (KMS) are information technology systems which enable employees to electronically capture and distribute knowledge across the organisation. Because knowledge sharing is often a discretionary behaviour requiring time and energy on behalf of employees, the success of KMS largely relies on their motivation and willingness to share. KMS implemented within organisations have been largely ineffective with failure rates of 80% documented in the knowledge management literature. There is a need for further understanding of the barriers and facilitators for employee contributions to KMS. In particular, there is a dearth of empirical research examining the role of social and organisational factors in knowledge sharing on KMS. To this end, a programme of research was developed which utilised normative and social exchange perspectives to explain employee knowledge sharing on KMS. A combination of research methodologies were employed across five field-based studies. The aim of Study 1 was to identify the determinants of knowledge sharing on KMS. In Study 1, qualitative data were collected through 16 in-depth interviews with employees from a medium-sized private sector organisation. While several barriers and facilitators were identified, the most prevalent themes to emerge from the content analysis were perceived benefits and management support, highlighting the central role of social exchange and normative processes in explaining employee knowledge sharing on KMS. The results of Study 1 were used in conjunction with previous research to design the subsequent quantitative studies. Study 2 examined the mediating role of perceived benefits in the management support – knowledge sharing intentions relationship. It used a cross-sectional survey design and sampled 41 employees from a large private sector organisation. Three main findings emerged. First, management support was positively related to employees’ knowledge sharing intentions. Second, perceived benefits were positively related to employees’ knowledge sharing intentions. Third, perceived individual benefits mediated the relationship between management support and knowledge sharing intentions. Study 3 examined the moderating role of perceived organisational support (POS) in the management support – knowledge sharing intentions relationship. Study 2 and 3 were both quantitative studies taken from the same organisational setting but with different user groups. In Study 2, the users directly contributed their knowledge onto the system. In Study 3 (N = 45), the users shared their knowledge through an intermediary person. Study 3 further extended Study 2 by investigating knowledge sharing behaviour (N = 27) in addition to knowledge sharing intentions. Study 3 had three key findings. First, consistent with Study 2, management support was positively related to employees’ knowledge sharing intentions. Second, POS was positively related to employees’ knowledge sharing intentions and knowledge sharing behaviour. Third, POS moderated the relationship between management support and knowledge sharing behaviour. Study 4 replicated and extended the findings of the previous studies in a different organisational setting. Two separate studies were conducted in a medium-sized public sector organisation. In Study 4a (N = 295) data were collected at a single point in time. Study 4b (N = 246) extended the previous quantitative studies by examining two forms of management support for the KMS as well as collecting self-reported behavioural data (N= 130) at a second time period. Overall, the findings of these studies provided mixed support for the predictions. First, system-related management support, organisational identification, perceived individual benefit and perceived organisational benefit were directly related to employee knowledge sharing on KMS. However, contrary to prediction, POS was not found to be directly related to employee knowledge sharing across the two studies. Second, organisational identification was found to moderate the relationship between management support and knowledge sharing in Study 4a but not 4b. Third, POS moderated the relationship between management support and knowledge sharing in Study 4b, however, no such relationship was found in Study 4a. Finally, across the two studies, both perceived individual and organisational benefit were found to uniquely mediate the relationship between management support and knowledge sharing intentions. On the basis of the findings of the research programme, several conclusions were made. First, system-related support from management is an important determinant of employee knowledge sharing on KMS. Second, employees’ perception of the benefits derived from knowledge sharing has an important influence on their contributions to KMS. Third, the extent to which employees identify with the organisation influences their decision to share knowledge on KMS. Fourth, the extent to which employees perceive support from the organisation influences their decision to share knowledge on KMS.

Submitted in fullfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts (Research) Macquarie University, Division of Humanities, Dept. of Modern History. 2005. / Thesis (MA)--Macquarie University, Division of Humanities and Social Sciences, Dept. of Modern History, 2005. / Bibliography: p. 268-290. / Introduction -- 1. Norms, interests and humanitarian intervention -- 2. Bosnia and Somalia -- 3. Rwanda -- 4. The Clinton Administration and the Balkan Wars -- Conclusion. / A number of Constructivist and English school scholars have investigated the degree to which humanitarian intervention is allowed and legitimised by international society. In other words, they have examined the nature and strength of a norm permitting humanitarian intervention. It is the contention of this dissertation that another norm of humanitarian intervention - parallel but discrete - has been neglected. It is argued that ideas and beliefs shared by members of international society not only permit intervention but prescribe it in certain circumstances and this has been largely ignored in the literature. / Mode of access: World Wide Web. / 290 p

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Washington, 1997. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves [127]-136).

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Missouri-Columbia, 2004. / Typescript. Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 69-77). Also available on the Internet.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Missouri-Columbia, 2004. / Typescript. Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 69-77). Also available on the Internet.