What is educational entrepreneurship? Strategic action,temporality, and the expansion of US higher education

Theory and Society - The massive expansion of US higher education after World War II is a sociological puzzle: a spectacular feat of state capacity-building in a highly federated polity. Prior...     

Properties of the weighted log‐rank test in the design of confirmatory studies with delayed effects

Proportional hazards are a common assumption when designing confirmatory clinical trials in oncology. This assumption not only affects the analysis part but also the sample size calculation. The presence of delayed effects causes a change in the hazard ratio while the trial is ongoing since at the beginning we do not observe any difference between treatment arms, and after some unknown time point, the differences between treatment arms will start to appear. Hence, the proportional hazards assumption no longer holds, and both sample size calculation and analysis methods to be used should be reconsidered. The weighted log‐rank test allows a weighting for early, middle, and late differences through the Fleming and Harrington class of weights and is proven to be more efficient when the proportional hazards assumption does not hold. The Fleming and Harrington class of weights, along with the estimated delay, can be incorporated into the sample size calculation in order to maintain the desired power once the treatment arm differences start to appear. In this article, we explore the impact of delayed effects in group sequential and adaptive group sequential designs and make an empirical evaluation in terms of power and type‐I error rate of the of the weighted log‐rank test in a simulated scenario with fixed values of the Fleming and Harrington class of weights. We also give some practical recommendations regarding which methodology should be used in the presence of delayed effects depending on certain characteristics of the trial.     

Global Responses to the COVID-19 Pandemic

Public Organization Review -     

税务行政裁量权的理论阐释、行为纠偏与路径选择

税法中不确定概念下的理论空间以及税务行政的实践需求共同营造了税务行政裁量的制度空间，而不规范的税务行政裁量则为不规范的税收执法提供了操作机会。通过对税法文本中不确定概念理论缘由的寻求，以及税收征管中实践动因的梳理，税务行政裁量权的规范化确有必要性。为达成税法运行各司其职中的彼此制衡，有必要强化比例性原则在税务行政裁量中的运用，以此限制税权介入纳税人私域的范围与限度，并提供明确化的宏观指引；利用行政裁量基准“行政自制”与“规则之治”的双重品质，借助标准化的文本修正，为规范化的税收执法预设行为轨迹、构建外在制约并压缩裁量空间；以纳税人的同意权为基础，设计符合税法特殊性的程序规则，形成立体化的纳税人救济路径。最终形成税务行政裁量权积极运作与规范运行的制度环境。     

Can Children Recognize Bodily Expressions of Emotion?

Journal of Nonverbal Behavior - Past research has demonstrated that children understand distinct emotion concepts and can accurately recognize facial expressions of distinct emotions by a young...     

Nested exposure case-control sampling: a sampling scheme to analyze rare time-dependent exposures

For large cohort studies with rare outcomes, the nested case-control design only requires data collection of small subsets of the individuals at risk. These are typically randomly sampled at the observed event times and a weighted, stratified analysis takes over the role of the full cohort analysis. Motivated by observational studies on the impact of hospital-acquired infection on hospital stay outcome, we are interested in situations, where not necessarily the outcome is rare, but time-dependent exposure such as the occurrence of an adverse event or disease progression is. Using the counting process formulation of general nested case-control designs, we propose three sampling schemes where not all commonly observed outcomes need to be included in the analysis. Rather, inclusion probabilities may be time-dependent and may even depend on the past sampling and exposure history. A bootstrap analysis of a full cohort data set from hospital epidemiology allows us to investigate the practical utility of the proposed sampling schemes in comparison to a full cohort analysis and a too simple application of the nested case-control design, if the outcome is not rare.

     

The context of employment discrimination: interpreting the findings of a field experiment

Although field experiments have documented the contemporary relevance of discrimination in employment, theories developed to explain the dynamics of differential treatment cannot account for differences across organizational and institutional contexts. In this article, I address this shortcoming by presenting the main empirical findings from a multi‐method research project, in which a field experiment of ethnic discrimination in the Norwegian labour market was complemented with forty‐two in‐depth interviews with employers who were observed in the first stage of the study. While the experimental data support earlier findings in documenting that ethnic discrimination indeed takes place, the qualitative material suggests that theorizing in the field experiment literature have been too concerned with individual and intra‐psychic explanations. Discriminatory outcomes in employment processes seems to be more dependent on contextual factors such as the number of applications received, whether requirements are specified, and the degree to which recruitment procedures are formalized. I argue that different contexts of employment provide different opportunity structures for discrimination, a finding with important theoretical and methodological implications.     

Efficacy,Action, and Support for Reducing Climate Change Risks

A growing body of research demonstrates that believing action to reduce the risks of climate change is both possible (self‐efficacy) and effective (response efficacy) is essential to motivate and sustain risk mitigation efforts. Despite this potentially critical role of efficacy beliefs, measures and their use vary wildly in climate change risk perception and communication research, making it hard to compare and learn from efficacy studies. To address this problem and advance our understanding of efficacy beliefs, this article makes three contributions. First, we present a theoretically motivated approach to measuring climate change mitigation efficacy, in light of diverse proposed, perceived, and previously researched strategies. Second, we test this in two national survey samples (Amazon's Mechanical Turk N = 405, GfK Knowledge Panel N = 1,820), demonstrating largely coherent beliefs by level of action and discrimination between types of efficacy. Four additive efficacy scales emerge: personal self‐efficacy, personal response efficacy, government and collective self‐efficacy, and government and collective response efficacy. Third, we employ the resulting efficacy scales in mediation models to test how well efficacy beliefs predict climate change policy support, controlling for specific knowledge, risk perceptions, and ideology, and allowing for mediation by concern. Concern fully mediates the relatively strong effects of perceived risk on policy support, but only partly mediates efficacy beliefs. Stronger government and collective response efficacy beliefs and personal self‐efficacy beliefs are both directly and indirectly associated with greater support for reducing the risks of climate change, even after controlling for ideology and causal beliefs about climate change.     

Constrained vs unconstrained labor supply: the economics of dual job holding

This paper develops a unified model of dual and unitary job holding based on a Stone-Geary utility function. The model incorporates both constrained and unconstrained labor supply. Panel data methods are adapted to accommodate unobserved heterogeneity and multinomial selection into six mutually exclusive labor supply regimes. We estimate the wage and income elasticities arising from selection and unobserved heterogeneity as well as from the Stone-Geary Slutsky equations. The labor supply model is estimated with data from the British Household Panel Survey 1991–2008. Among dual job holders, our study finds that the Stone-Geary income and wage elasticities are much larger for labor supply to the second job compared with the main job. When the effects of selection and unobserved heterogeneity are taken account of, the magnitudes of these elasticities on the second job tend to be significantly reduced.