Guest  

 
Search: 
Search By: SubjectAbstractAuthorTitleFull-Text

 

Showing 1 through 5 of 3,246 records.
Pages: Previous - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... 650 - Next  Jump:
2011 - AWP Annual Conference Pages: unavailable || Words: 258 words || 
Info
1. Gonzalez, Kirsten., Galupo, Paz., Schurtz, David. and Buckingham, Justin. "Social Comparisons in Romantic Relationships: The Effects of Sexual Orientation on Comparison Target" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the AWP Annual Conference, Hyatt Regency Philadelphia at Penns Landing, Philadelphia, PA, Mar 03, 2011 Online <PDF>. 2019-10-15 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p487993_index.html>
Publication Type: POSTER
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: The present research used the Relationship Social Comparison Measure to explore differences across sexual orientation when making comparisons related to ones romantic relationship. Participants included 2225 (2018 heterosexual and 207 sexual minority) U.S. college students. Significant differences occurred across sexual orientation in terms of the comparison target relationship.

2012 - American Sociological Association Annual Meeting Pages: unavailable || Words: 3927 words || 
Info
2. Nicklett, Emily. "Social Position and Social Comparisons: Community versus Society Comparisons of Subjective Social Status" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association Annual Meeting, Colorado Convention Center and Hyatt Regency, Denver, CO, Aug 16, 2012 Online <PDF>. 2019-10-15 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p565951_index.html>
Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: This study examines whether or not subjective social status rankings differ according to social characteristics. A Probit analysis was conducted on 10,282 participants to test whether social position predicts higher or lower subjective rankings relative to one’s community or nation. Socially advantaged respondents ranked themselves higher in national comparisons, while disadvantaged respondents ranked themselves higher in community comparisons. Some social position characteristics predicted the magnitude of difference in rankings. These findings demonstrate meaningful differences in how individuals rank themselves on subjective scales according to objective measures of social standing. These differences should be considered in future research utilizing subjective social status scales.

2014 - International Communication Association 64th Annual Conference Pages: unavailable || Words: 11813 words || 
Info
3. Lin, Sue-Jen. "First- and Third-Person Perceptions: Using the Ostensible Audience as a Comparison Anchor in the Processes of Downward and Upward Social Comparisons" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association 64th Annual Conference, Seattle Sheraton Hotel, Seattle, Washington, May 21, 2014 Online <APPLICATION/PDF>. 2019-10-15 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p713335_index.html>
Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: This study represents an attempt to draw attention to the neglected “ostensible audience” implied in Davison’s original specification of the third-person effect, and emphasizes the importance of the role of the ostensible audience as a comparison anchor in the downward and upward self-enhancing social comparison processes to achieve what the estimators consider to be accurate social judgments under uncertainty.
Two studies were conducted: a survey concerning the perceived self-other differences in media vulnerability to negative political advertisements; and an experiment concerning how viewers assessed their and others’ receptivity to a documentary film that raises awareness of global climate change. The results confirmed that using the most vulnerable audience as a comparison anchor in a downward social comparison process resulted in third-person perception estimation, whereas the most fortunate recipients of socially desirable messages were used as comparison anchors for making first-person perception judgments in a process of upward social comparison.

2015 - Association for Asian Studies - Annual Conference Words: 273 words || 
Info
4. Ma, Shaoling. "Capital Comparisons or Does a Theory of Comparison Also Compare?" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Asian Studies - Annual Conference, Sheraton Hotel & Towers, Chicago, Illinois, <Not Available>. 2019-10-15 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p953535_index.html>
Publication Type: Panel Paper
Abstract: Comparison, to ventriloquize what Frederic Jameson observes of capital, is a
totalizing or systemic concept: no one has ever met or seen the thing itself. Like
capital, comparison is everywhere and simultaneously nowhere. If capitalism,
according to Pheng Cheah, is the ultimate comparing machine, the question then
is whether an analysis of capital can compare otherwise. This paper first reviews
two contemporary debates comparative literature: noncentric and deconstructive
approaches and another based on systemic, large-model theories, and argues that
both approaches have obstructed a thinking of comparison itself as a totalizing
or systemic concept for a critique of global capital. The second part of this paper
then works out a dialectical theory of comparison by arguing that whether it is
discussing accumulation, contradiction, social relation, historical development,
or conflict, Marx’s analysis of capital spells some of the principle activities of
comparison. I am neither interested in developing a homology between economic
and comparative processes (economic exchange is structured like comparison,
etc.), nor am I keen to see the finished work of comparison as a kind of “universal
equivalent,” which in turn stands outside of the process of comparison. Rather, I
claim that comparison is value-formation because it establishes identity and non-
identity between things, and because the economic activity of giving values to
things reveal a complex and at the same time basic, functional activity that cannot
be reduced to vague notions of incommensurability. The stakes, however, in
examining value-formation in Capital I as a work of comparison return us to the
opening question: is capitalism really the comparatist and Marx its critic? Or, to
put it differently, does a theory of comparison also compare?

Pages: Previous - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... 650 - Next  Jump:

©2019 All Academic, Inc.   |   All Academic Privacy Policy