How not to become a museum piece

In this essay I want to address two question marks which arose during my reading of Michael Burawoy's inspiring piece. First, sharing his spirit of recreating the sociological enlightenment by differentiating between different types of public sociologies, I do not share his optimism that sociology can easily become an integral part of public discourse and practice. Second, I don't think that mainstream sociology is really prepared for this adventure. My argument points in the opposite direction: all the different forms of public and non-public sociology are in danger of becoming museum pieces. Thus, sociology not only needs a public voice, it also needs to be reinvented first--in order to have a public voice at all!     

Prejudice and Group-Related Behavior in Germany

This article analyses the relationship of ethnic prejudice and discriminatory behavioral intentions in Germany. We utilize two representative surveys conducted in 2002 and 2004 ( N = 2,722 and 1,383, respectively) as well as a longitudinal study with three annual measurement points (2002–2004; N = 825). Results show that prejudice is substantially correlated with the respondents' reports of their own discriminatory intentions ( R = .33 to .49). Controlling for additional psychological variables, the cross-lagged, longitudinal analyses support the causal hypothesis that prejudice leads to discriminatory intentions. Additional influences on discriminatory intentions—intergroup threat and intergroup contact—are substantially mediated by ethnic prejudice. Thus, a practical implication of these results is that the reduction of intergroup threat and increment of intergroup contact may well lead to both reduced intergroup prejudice and to less discriminatory behavior .     

Reconsidering the common ratio effect: the roles of compound independence,reduction, and coalescing

Common ratio effects should be ruled out if subjects’ preferences satisfy compound independence, reduction of compound lotteries, and coalescing. In other words, at least one of these axioms should be violated in order to generate a common ratio effect. Relying on a simple experiment, we investigate which failure of these axioms is concomitant with the empirical observation of common ratio effects. We observe that compound independence and reduction of compound lotteries hold, whereas coalescing is systematically violated. This result provides support for theories which explain the common ratio effect by violations of coalescing (i.e., configural weight theory) instead of violations of compound independence (i.e., rank-dependent utility or cumulative prospect theory).     

Bologna and student mobility: a fuzzy relationship

The national ministers in charge of higher education of the majority of European countries agreed in the late 1990s to embark on reforms on the way towards a “European Higher Education Area”. The major aim was to increase and enhance international student mobility, whereby the establishment of a convergent system of “cycles” of study programmes should be the major operational objective. Actually, the spread of the bachelor-master structure seems to have triggered an increase of degree mobility from outside Europe to Europe in the early years of the so-called “Bologna Process”. This, however, slowed down subsequently. Moreover, the Bologna Process has not led to a growing pace of intra-European degree mobility. Since 2009, a new target is in the limelight: By 2020, 20% of graduates should have had international experience through study or internship in another country for at least some period. Actually, however, the rate of the event of student mobility during the course of study had been already quite high in many European countries around 2000 and did not increase further substantially thereafter. Thus, the quantitative target is a challenge for some countries with low outwards mobility. Altogether, the Bologna Process rather seems to have improved the conditions and the quality of intra-European mobility more substantially than its quantitative development.     

Assessment of physical activity in older people with and without cognitive impairment

The purpose of this study was to validate a new interview-administered physical activity questionnaire (Assessment of Physical Activity in Frail Older People; APAFOP) in older people with and without cognitive impairment. The authors assessed feasibility, validity, and test-retest reliability in 168 people (n = 78 with, n = 88 without cognitive impairment). Concurrent validity was assessed against an inertia-based motion sensor and an established questionnaire. Sensitivity to change was tested in an ongoing study in patients with mild to moderate dementia (n = 81). Assessment of physical activity by the APAFOP and the motion sensor correlated well in the total sample (TS; p = .705), as well as in the subsamples with cognitive impairment (CI; p = .585) and without CI (p = .787). Excellent feasibility with an acceptance rate of 100%, test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficients ranging from .973 (TS) to .975 (CI) to .966 (no CI), and sensitivity to change (effect sizes: 0.35-1.47) were found in both subsamples.     

Vertrauen bei Internet-Auktionen

The text replies to the article “Trust and Reputation in Internet-Auctions” (KZfSS, Vol. 54, No. 4, pp. 674–693) by Diekmann and Wyder. In principle the authors’ consideration regarding a premium for reputation for trustworthy participants in internet auctions seems to be attractive. However, we object to the lacking definitions of the categories of trust and reputation as well as to the problematic design of their central indicator (reputation). With regard to their interpretation we criticize the missing consideration of qualitative — especially negative — statements in the public rating systems, underestimating the relevance of “critical incidents” to fragile trust relations on the internet. Finally we remark that Diekmann and Wyder misjudge the founding, cultivating and modifying activities (including imposing sanctions) of the platform owner towards this institution regulating the market.