Future Empirical Research (future + empirical_research)

Distribution by Scientific Domains

Selected Abstracts

An Applied Econometricians' View of Empirical Corporate Governance Studies

Axel Börsch-Supan
The economic analysis of corporate governance is in vogue. In addition to a host of theoretical papers, an increasing number of empirical studies analyze how ownership structure, capital structure, board structure, and the market for corporate control influence firm performance. This is not an easy task, and indeed, for reasons explained in this survey, empirical studies on corporate governance have more than the usual share of econometric problems. This paper is a critical survey of the recent empirical literature on corporate governance , to show which methodological lessons can be learned for future empirical research in the field of corporate governance, paying particular attention to German institutions and data availability. [source]

Managing people and performance: an evidence based framework applied to health service organizations

Susan Michie
People and their performance are key to an organization's effectiveness. This review describes an evidence-based framework of the links between some key organizational influences and staff performance, health and well-being. This preliminary framework integrates management and psychological approaches, with the aim of assisting future explanation, prediction and organizational change. Health care is taken as the focus of this review, as there are concerns internationally about health care effectiveness. The framework considers empirical evidence for links between the following organizational levels: 1Context (organizational culture and inter-group relations; resources, including staffing; physical environment) 2People management (HRM practices and strategies; job design, workload and teamwork; employee involvement and control over work; leadership and support) 3Psychological consequences for employees (health and stress; satisfaction and commitment; knowledge, skills and motivation) 4Employee behaviour (absenteeism and turnover; task and contextual performance; errors and near misses) 5Organizational performance; patient care. This review contributes to an evidence base for policies and practices of people management and performance management. Its usefulness will depend on future empirical research, using appropriate research designs, sufficient study power and measures that are reliable and valid. [source]

Self-Pity: Exploring the Links to Personality, Control Beliefs, and Anger

Joachim Stöber
Self-pity is a frequent response to stressful events. So far, however, empirical research has paid only scant attention to this subject. The present article aims at exploring personality characteristics associated with individual differences in feeling sorry for oneself. Two studies with N=141 and N=161 university students were conducted, employing multidimensional measures of personality, control beliefs, anger, loneliness, and adult attachment. With respect to personality, results showed strong associations of self-pity with neuroticism, particularly with the depression facet. With respect to control beliefs, individuals high in self-pity showed generalized externality beliefs, seeing themselves as controlled by both chance and powerful others. With respect to anger expression, self-pity was primarily related to anger-in. Strong connections with anger rumination were also found. Furthermore, individuals high in self-pity reported emotional loneliness and ambivalent-worrisome attachments. Finally, in both studies, a strong correlation with gender was found, with women reporting more self-pity reactions to stress than men. Findings are discussed with respect to how they support, extend, and qualify the previous literature on self-pity, and directions for future empirical research are pointed out. There are a hundred ways to overcome an obstacle and one sure way not to,self-pity. Dale Dauten, columnist [source]

The Emergency of Climate Change: Why Are We Failing to Take Action?

Cynthia M. Frantz
Latane and Darley developed a five-stage model to understand why people do and do not help other people in emergency situations. We extend their five-stage model to explore why people do and do not take action against climate change. We identify the factors that make climate change difficult to notice and ambiguous as an emergency; we explore barriers to taking responsibility for action; and we discuss the issues of efficacy and costs versus benefits that make action unlikely. The resulting analysis is useful on two levels. For educators and policy makers, the model suggests the most efficacious approaches to galvanizing action among U.S. citizens. For social scientists, the model provides a valuable framework for integrating research from diverse areas of psychology and suggests fruitful avenues for future empirical research. [source]

Testing the Time-Variancy of Explanatory Factors of Strategic Change,

José David Vicente-Lorente
The article proposes an empirical framework able to: (1) assess the relative validity of both adaptive and inertial views of strategic change and (2) verify the potential time- or context-dependency by testing the structural stability of the empirical model, in Spanish banks, 1983,1997. Results offer inconclusive findings regarding (1) but strong evidence to answer (2). The assumption of structural stability is rejected and the effect of many explanatory factors considered in the empirical model varies over time as some factors show different effects and/or significance levels depending on the period considered. These findings suggest that explanatory models of strategic change should be viewed as ,time-' or ,context-dependent'. The article provides a conceptual model in which alternative explanations operate in a sequential way. The results highlight, first, that inconclusive past findings about adaptive versus inertial views should be reviewed under this new evidence, and future empirical research must assure that its methods and interpretations are robust to potential structural breakdowns; and second, the limitations raised by the static approach offered by the available theories/models when approaching the dynamic and complex nature of strategic change. Theoretical developments and implications for managerial practice are suggested. [source]