The Relative Salience of Facial Features When Differentiating Faces Based on an Interference Paradigm

Research on face recognition and social judgment usually addresses the manipulation of facial features (eyes, nose, mouth, etc.). Using a procedure based on a Stroop-like task, Montepare and Opeyo (J Nonverbal Behav 26(1):43?C59, 2002) established a hierarchy of the relative salience of cues based on facial attributes when differentiating faces. Using the same perceptual interference task, we established a hierarchy of facial features. Twenty-three participants (13 men and 10 women) volunteered for the experiment to compare pairs of frontal faces. The participants had to judge if the eyes, nose, mouth and chin in the pair of images were the same or different. The factors manipulated were the target-distractive factor (4 face components?×?3 distractive factors), interference (absent vs. present) and correct answer (the same vs. different). The analysis of reaction times and errors showed that the eyes and mouth were processed before the chin and nose, thus highlighting the critical importance of the eyes and mouth, as shown by previous research.     

Nanoblogging PR: The discourse on public relations in Twitter

By analysing 653 tweets that include the word “public relations” or the acronym “PR”, the purpose of this paper is to show how Twitter contributes to the development of the theory and practice of public relations. In order to achieve this aim, an exploratory research has been conducted.     

Consistent Testing of Cointegrating Relationships

In this paper we investigate methods for testing the existence of a cointegration relationship among the components of a nonstationary fractionally integrated (NFI) vector time series. Our framework generalizes previous studies restricted to unit root integrated processes and permits simultaneous analysis of spurious and cointegrated NFI vectors. We propose a modified F‐statistic, based on a particular studentization, which converges weakly under both hypotheses, despite the fact that OLS estimates are only consistent under cointegration. This statistic leads to a Wald‐type test of cointegration when combined with a narrow band GLS‐type estimate. Our semiparametric methodology allows consistent testing of the spurious regression hypothesis against the alternative of fractional cointegration without prior knowledge on the memory of the original series, their short run properties, the cointegrating vector, or the degree of cointegration. This semiparametric aspect of the modelization does not lead to an asymptotic loss of power, permitting the Wald statistic to diverge faster under the alternative of cointegration than when testing for a hypothesized cointegration vector. In our simulations we show that the method has comparable power to customary procedures under the unit root cointegration setup, and maintains good properties in a general framework where other methods may fail. We illustrate our method testing the cointegration hypothesis of nominal GNP and simple‐sum (M1, M2, M3) monetary aggregates.     

A GLOBAL VIEW OF CROSS‐BORDER MIGRATION

This paper evaluates the global welfare impact of observed levels of migration using a quantitative multi‐sector model of the world economy calibrated to aggregate and firm‐level data. Our framework features cross‐country labor productivity differences, international trade, remittances, and a heterogeneous workforce. We compare welfare under the observed levels of migration to a no‐migration counterfactual. In the long run, natives in countries that received a lot of migration—such as Canada or Australia—are better off due to greater product variety available in consumption and as intermediate inputs. In the short run, the impact of migration on average welfare in these countries is close to zero, while the skilled and unskilled natives tend to experience welfare changes of opposite signs. The remaining natives in countries with large emigration flows—such as Jamaica or El Salvador—are also better off due to migration, but for a different reason: remittances. The welfare impact of observed levels of migration is substantial, at about 5% to 10% for the main receiving countries and about 10% in countries with large incoming remittances.