The historic importance of degree structure: A comparison of bachelor to master transitions in Norway and Denmark

The Bologna process and the 3+2-degree structure presents students with several decision points in higher education, both which bachelor’s programme to choose, and whether to continue beyond bachelor. Based on a small-scale survey containing both closed and open-ended questions, this paper studies reasons the students give for entering a master’s programme. We compare students in Norway and Denmark who have entered a master’s programme in educational studies. In both countries, students mention multiple reasons for choosing to enter the master’s level, and reasons related to career and access to interesting jobs were most frequently mentioned. Additionally, academic motives and identity motives were mentioned. There are also differences between Norwegian and Danish students, but these differences are mainly linked to aspects of the transition. In Denmark, students who change institution when entering the master’s level state different reasons, while in Norway, differences are related to whether students enter a master’s programme directly or delayed. Further, differences in labour market structure also affects these transitions. These differences point to historical understandings of national status differences between degrees and institutions still being important, even if the implementation of the Bologna structure in the educational system should have led to a harmonisation.

The irrational interplay between partisanship, beliefs about the severity of the COVID-19 pandemic, and support for policy interventions

The COVID-19 pandemic is a global crisis that has forced governments around the world to implement large-scale interventions such as school closures and national lockdowns. Previous research has shown that partisanship plays a major role in explaining public attitudes towards these policies and beliefs about the severity of the crisis. However, the cognitive roots of this phenomenon remain poorly understood. In principle, partisan gaps in policy support could emerge from cost-benefit analyses from individuals with dissimilar perceptions about the severity of the pandemic, as proposed by rational models of partisan behavior. Alternatively, polarized responses may be driven by social identity motives that are unrelated to individual beliefs, as predicted by theories of tribal partisanship. Here, we tested the predictions of these two models across four experiments (N=1980) performed in four different countries (Argentina, Uruguay, Brazil, and the United States). Participants forecasted the number of COVID-19 deaths in their country after considering either a high or low number. Then, they rated their agreement with a series of interventions. This anchoring procedure, which experimentally induced a large variability in the forecasted number of deaths, did not modify policy preferences. Instead, we observed that partisanship independently modulated the optimism of forecasts and participants’ support for COVID-19 policies. These results, which are against the predictions of the rational partisanship model, have strong policy implications. In particular, our findings suggest that communication strategies aimed at informing the public about the severity of the pandemic will not substantially change levels of support for COVID-19 interventions.

Motif Menonton Vlog "Keluarga Beti" Channel Youtube Arif Muhammad

This study aims to determine the motives of vlog audience "beti family". This study uses in-depth interviews, and documentation. Measurement of motifs in this study uses McQuail's motive theory, namely: information motives, personal identity motives, social interaction motives, and entertainment motives. The Uses and Gratification Theory assumes that media is not all powerful, which has a high power, that is to its users. Media users have the choice of consuming media to satisfy their needs. The "Beti Family" vlog Arif Muhammad's youtube channel is the research subject chosen by the researcher. This is because one of the drama vlogs on YouTube is the most popular community and is often included in YouTube's tranding column. The results that can be dominant in the motives of social interaction and entertainment motives. The informant's answer about the motives of social interaction because it allows the informant to interact with each other and get new conversations about the uniqueness contained in this vlog. And for answers about entertainment motives because they want to get entertainment and want to get rid of boredom.

The dark side of social movements: Social identity, non-conformity, and the lure of conspiracy theories

Social change does not always equal social progress--there is a dark side of social movements. We discuss conspiracy theory beliefs –beliefs that a powerful group of people are secretly working towards a malicious goal–as one contributor to destructive social movements. Research has linked conspiracy theory beliefs to anti-democratic attitudes, prejudice and non-normative political behavior. We propose a framework to understand the motivational processes behind conspiracy theories and associated social identities and collective action. We argue that conspiracy theories comprise at least two components – content and qualities— that appeal to people differently based on their motivations. Social identity motives draw people foremost to contents of conspiracy theories while uniqueness motives draw people to qualities of conspiracy theories.

Changing Logics in Healthcare and Their Effects on the Identity Motives and Identity Work of Doctors

Recent literature on hybridity has provided useful insights into how professionals have responded to changing institutional logics. Our focus is on how shifting logics have shaped senior medical professionals’ identity motives and identity work in a qualitative study of hospital consultants in the United Kingdom’s National Health Service. We found a binary divide between a large category of traditionalist doctors who reject shifting logics, and a much smaller category of incorporated consultants who broadly accept shifting logics and advocate change, with little evidence of significant ambivalence or temporary identity ‘fixes’ associated with liminality. By developing a new inductively generated framework, we show how the identity motives and identity work of these two categories of doctors differ significantly. We explore the underlying causes of these differences, and the implications they hold for theory and practice in medical professionalism, medical professional leadership and healthcare reform.