Corporate Giving in Australia: An Analysis of Motives and Barriers

This study comprises data analysis of data collected by McNair Ingenuity Research as part of the 2005 Giving Australia study, which estimated the total value of corporate giving for the year 2003‐04 at $3.3 billion. This was contributed by 67% of all Australian businesses. Business giving was found to comprise 68% monetary donations, 16% goods and 16% services. This article concentrates on the monetary donations of businesses, reporting on the motives and barriers businesses named for making donations. More than 80% of businesses are motivated to give, at least in part, by altruism, with larger businesses (by number of employees and turnover) more likely to claim benefits in terms of enhancements to employee morale, the organisation's image, supplier/customer relationships and the general level of publicity they were able to attract. The most significant barrier to giving named by both businesses who made a donation and those who did not was that business resources were committed elsewhere. Looking at how additional giving might be stimulated among those already giving to the sector revealed that the most generous businesses also cited more barriers to giving suggesting that they give greater consideration to their giving and the drawbacks thereof.     

Relational message interpretations of touch,conversational distance,and posture

According to a social meaning model of nonverbal communication, many nonverbal behaviors have consensually recognized meanings. Two field experiments examined this presumption by investigating the relational message interpretations assigned to differing levels and types of touch, proximity, and posture. Also examined were the possible moderating effects of the communicator characteristics of gender and attractiveness and relationship characteristics of gender composition and status differentials. Results showed that touching typically conveyed more composure, immediacy, receptivity/trust, affection, similarity/depth/equality, dominance, and informality than its absence. The form of touch also mattered, with handholding and face touching expressing the most intimacy, composure, and informality; handholding and the handshake expressing the least dominance, and the handshake conveying the most formality but also receptivity/trust. Postural openness/relaxation paralleled touch in conveying greater intimacy, composure, informality, and similarity but was also less dominant than a closed/tense posture. Close proximity was also more immediate and similar but dominant. Proximity and postural openness together produced differential interpretations of composure, similarity, and affection. Gender initiator attractiveness was more influential than status in moderating interpretations.An earlier version of this paper was presented to the Interpersonal Communication Interest Group, Western States Communication Association convention, Phoenix, Arizona, February 1991. The author wishes to thank Leesa Dillman for her assistance on that version.     

Der Sinn der Modelle

With the exception of an indeed important formal detail of the model of frame selection, the criticism of Rohwer both on the model itself and on the general approach to explain divorces is not comprehensible. Partly, it consists of even serious misinterpretations, which are due to the fact that the author is not familiar with important textual backgrounds or did not consider them. Partly, global accusations are being made, which are finally true for any approach, which has not yet solved all problems beforehand, including all current approaches in the research on divorce. Besides the correction of the misinterpretations of the model of frame selection and sociological explanations, this contribution particularly proposes a simple solution of the formal problem.     

”Technisierung und Subjektivierung. Zur Veränderung des Arbeitshandelns in der Wissensgesellschaft“ Workshop der Akademie für Technikfolgenabschätzung in Baden-Württemberg, 28./29.11.2002

Ohne Zusammenfassung     

An exploratory study of gambling cross addictions

A growing body of empirical and theoretical research has concentrated on the overlaps and commonalities among chemical and non-chemical (behavioural) addictions. Pathological gambling has perhaps been the most widely researched behavioural addiction and some of this research has concerned the co-existing links between pathological gambling and alcohol/drug addiction in both the gambling substance abuser and the substance abusing gambler (i.e. cross addiction). This study was of an exploratory nature and attempted to gather information and data regarding gambling cross addictions in the UK. To achieve this, 456 letters were sent to all drug and alcohol helping agencies in England requesting such information. This yielded 210 returns (46% response rate). Results indicated that gambling cross addictions occur in both adults and adolescents and were almost exclusively a male condition. However, it must be noted only just over half of the responding agencies had encountered gambling cross addiction and reasons for this are speculated. Results also indicated the existence of various cross addicted subgroups including an adolescent subgroup who were addicted to fruit machines and abused solvents. Future research ideas are also discussed.A more detailed version of this paper is available from the author on request.