What Oath (if Any) Did Jacob Henry Take in 1809?: The Problem of Conceptual Confusion Between State Religious Tests and Religious Test Oaths

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Seth Barrett Tillman
Keyword(s):  
Conceptual Confusion

Concluding Summary

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carrie Figdor
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
External Factors ◽  
Cognitive Capacity ◽  
Human Cognition ◽  
Conceptual Foundation ◽  
The Social ◽  
New Research ◽  
Internal And External Factors ◽  
Conceptual Confusion

Chapter 10 provides a summary of the argument of the book. It elaborates some of the benefits of Literalism, such as less conceptual confusion and an expanded range of entities for research that might illuminate human cognition. It motivates distinguishing the questions of whether something has a cognitive capacity from whether it is intuitively like us. It provides a conceptual foundation for the social sciences appropriate for the increasing role of modeling in these sciences. It also promotes convergence in terms of the roles of internal and external factors in explaining both human and nonhuman behavior. Finally, it sketches some of the areas of new research that it supports, including group cognition and artificial intelligence.

scholarly journals Corporate entrepreneurship - Distilling the concept

2015 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 69 ◽  
Author(s):  
Colene Hind ◽  
Renier Steyn
Keyword(s):  
Key Words ◽  
Corporate Entrepreneurship ◽  
The Other ◽  
Strategic Renewal ◽  
Corporate Venturing ◽  
Body Of Knowledge ◽  
Core Elements ◽  
Conceptual Confusion ◽  
Level Of Agreement

<p><strong>Background:</strong> Corporate entrepreneurship (CE) is credited for many positive organisational outcomes, including systemic growth and increased revenue. Several terms associated with CE, including strategic renewal, corporate venturing and intrapreneurship are frequently used interchangeably and often confuse scholars, researchers and practitioners. The lack of clarity about the exact meaning of these terms is detrimental to the synergy in the current body of knowledge and the development of models involving these concepts. Objective: The aim of this paper was to describe CE as a unique concept, distinguishable from related concepts. Methodology: Several definitions of CE as well as the related terms were dissected, to identify core elements associated with each of them. The validity of these comprehensive definitions was tested by requesting 68 master’s degree students to classify the definitions. Inter-rater reliabilities were calculated in order to assess the level of agreement in the classification of the constructs. Results: The results indicate that CE is difficult to distinguish from strategic renewal and corporate venturing, but that intrapreneurship seems to be better defined and separate from the other constructs. Conclusion: These results emphasise the conceptual confusion that exists around CE and the need for further clarification of terminology.</p><p><strong>KEY WORDS</strong></p><p>Corporate entrepreneurship, strategic renewal, corporate venturing, intrapreneurship.</p>

scholarly journals When is a Learning Object not an Object: A first step towards a theory of learning objects

2002 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mike Sosteric ◽  
Susan Hesemeier
Keyword(s):  
Economies Of Scale ◽  
Learning Objects ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Object A ◽  
Smart Learning ◽  
Smart Learning Environments ◽  
Adequate Definition ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Conceptual Confusion

<p> For some, “learning objects" are the “next big thing” in distance education promising smart learning environments, fantastic economies of scale, and the power to tap into expanding educational markets. While learning objects may be revolutionary in the long term, in the short term, definitional problems and conceptual confusion undermine our ability to understand and critically evaluate the emerging field. This article is an attempt to provide an adequate definition of learning objects by (a) jettisoning useless theoretical links hitherto invoked to theorize learning objects, and (b) reducing the definition of learning objects to the bare essentials. The article closes with suggestions for further research and further refinement of the definition of learning objects. </P>

Commissioning and social determinants: evidence and opportunities

2020 ◽  
pp. 269-282
Author(s):  
Chris O’Leary ◽  
Chris Fox
Keyword(s):  
Social Determinants Of Health ◽  
Social Determinants ◽  
Local Area ◽  
Determinants Of Health ◽  
Purchasing Power ◽  
Local Authorities ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Conceptual Confusion

This chapter argues that local authorities can and should use their purchasing power strategically to address the social determinants of health that affect their local area. It examines commissioning and procurement as local authority functions, defining these concepts and exploring the conceptual confusion between the two. The chapter then looks at the evidence of current practice of local authorities (with a particular focus on local authorities in the UK) in strategic use of their purchasing power. Core to the argument is the role of local voluntary organisations and small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), so there is a particular focus on the commissioning experience of these types of organisations. Finally, the chapter makes the case for the role that voluntary sector organisations can play in addressing social determinants of health, before drawing some broad conclusions about the way forward.

Conceptual Levels of Information Processing and Information Interpretation in Knowledge Management

2010 ◽  
pp. 75-90
Author(s):  
Murako Saito
Keyword(s):  
Knowledge Management ◽  
Information Processing ◽  
Organizational Learning ◽  
Common Ground ◽  
Organizational Resilience ◽  
Reflective Process ◽  
Constructive Dialogue ◽  
Information Interpretation ◽  
Conceptual Confusion

In managing knowledge, conceptual confusion on information arises frequently among researchers in different disciplines. The term of information is defined at least into four: data, information, knowledge, and wisdom. Procedural ways of information are different among disciplines even when the definition is similar. Interpretation of information varies in accordance with its meaning or its value for the receivers. Most of the misalignment in the field stems from different interpretations and the different procedural ways of the information presented. In this chapter, first, information processing levels in knowledge management and second, three levels in cognition-action reflective process are described. Thirdly, information interpretation in internal world, and finally juxtaposition of scientific and interpretive perspectives are discussed for developing organizational learning and organizational resilience and for building common ground for productive and constructive dialogue between and within disciplinary fields.

E-Leadership

2011 ◽  
pp. 161-165 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Gurr
Keyword(s):  
Experimental Research ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Concept Development ◽  
Stage Model ◽  
Social Environments ◽  
Quasi Experimental ◽  
Information And Communication ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Conceptual Confusion ◽  
Extended Discussion

Advances in information and communication technology (ICT) are changing organizations, with old practices being altered and new practices, spaces and possibilities created (Wertheim, 1999). It is the capacity of the ICT to support electronically mediated social environments that is causing reconceptualization of leadership conceptions. The emerging concept of e-leadership provides a framework to explore leadership in environments mediated by ICT. Unfortunately, there is considerable conceptual confusion about the term, with at least three different research streams producing different understandings. It is this complexity surrounding e-leadership that is the subject of this article (an extended discussion of this topic can be found in Gurr [2004] and Gurr and Broadbent [2004]). Research on e-leadership is at an early stage. In terms of Reichers and Scheider’s (1990, as described in Hunt, 1999, p. 131) three-stage model of concept development, which includes introduction/elaboration, evaluation/augmentation and consolidation/accommodation, the study of e-leadership is at the introduction/elaboration stage. While there is acknowledgment that a new concept of leadership may be needed, there is conceptual ambiguity as to what this might be, and limited research. Evidence and discussion about e-leadership comes from three main types of research: consultancy discussion papers, survey-based perceptual data, and experimental and quasi-experimental research.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document