论侵华日军对南京的毒品毒化政策

毒品毒化政策是日本侵华期间推行的一项丑恶而阴险的殖民政策。南京地区是日本当局推行这项政策的最重要而典型的地区之一。日本推行毒品毒化政策,主要依靠三大手段:第一,通过在华中地区建立与组织严密的贩毒机构网络,将南京置于其中并成为重要的一环;第二,指使与操纵伪政权,成立鸦片管理机构,努力使鸦片贩卖与吸食公开化、法律化;第三,通过种种卑劣手段,诱使中国民众吸食毒品,并控制中国烟民。通过这些手段,日本掠夺了中国人民大量财富以满足其侵略战争的需要,并直接导致南京人民日益贫困、道德败坏、犯罪率上升等严重后果。     

Significance levels for use in the analysis of combination drug trials

Proof of efficacy of fixed combination drugs under current guidelines requires that the combination be statistically significantly superior to each component and that, to insure model validity, each component be statistically significantly superior to a placebo. Simulations indicate that if each of these four tests is performed at a significance level of 0,05 then the actual test of effectiveness of the fixed combination drug is done at a significance level that can be as small as 0.0001. This would seem to be excessively conservative. Further simulations indicate that significance levels of approximately 0,10 to 0.20 should be employed for all tests except in unusual circumstances.     

Self–other rating agreement in leadership: A review

This paper reviews the theoretical and empirical literature on self–other rating agreement (SOA) related to leadership in the workplace, focusing primarily on research published between 1997 (the year of Atwater &; Yammarino's seminal paper on SOA) and the present. Much of the current interest in SOA derives from its purported relationships with self-awareness and leader effectiveness. The literature, however, has used a variety of metrics to assess SOA, resulting in discrepancies between findings across studies. As multi-rater (360-degree; multisource) feedback instruments continue to be widely used as a measure of leadership in organizations, it is important that we more clearly understand the relationships between SOA and its predictors and outcomes. To this end, in this article, we review (a) models of agreement, (b) factors affecting self-ratings and the congruence between self–others' ratings, (c) factors affecting others' ratings, (d) correlates of agreement, and (e) measurement issues and data analytic techniques. We conclude with discussions of practitioner issues and directions for future research.