In cross-cultural communication and adjunct disciplines such as cross-cultural management and international business, there is a negativity bias of seeing cultural differences as a source of potential issues. The emergence of Positive Organizational Scholarship (POS) questions this problem-focused approach. This paper contributes to the ongoing discussion from neuroscience’s perspectives in several ways. Firstly, it provides a neurological look at this bias. Secondly, it proposes that the problem-focused approach may (1) give us a biased outlook of cross-cultural encounters rather than a reality, (2) hinder creativity, (3) lead to the rebound effect, and (4) turn belief into reality. Finally, based on insight from neuroscience and adopting the POS lens with the connection between POS and creativity, it’s recommended that future research takes three directions: (1) Using similarity as the starting point; (2) strategize body language, context and theories; and (3) develop a multicultural mind. In essence, the paper contributes to existing knowledge of the field by employing an interdisciplinary approach, aiming to gain a more holistic view, provoke thoughts, and trigger future empirical studies.
DOCUMENT
Randomised controlled trials are strongly advocated to evaluate the effects of intervention programmes on household energy saving behaviours. While randomised controlled trials are the ideal, in many cases, they are not feasible. Notably, many intervention studies rely on voluntary participation of households in the intervention programme, in which case random selection and random assignment are seriously challenged. Moreover, studies employing randomised controlled trials typically do not study the underlying processes causing behaviour change. Yet, the latter is highly important to improve theory and practice. We propose a systematic approach to causal inference based on graphical causal models to study effects of intervention programmes on household energy saving behaviours when randomised controlled trials are not feasible. Using a simple example, we explain why such an approach not only provides a formal tool to accurately establish effects of intervention programmes, but also enables a better understanding of the processes underlying behaviour change.
LINK
Airborne wind energy (AWE) is an emerging renewable energy technology that uses kites to harvest winds at higher altitudes than wind turbines. Understanding how residents experience a local AWE system (AWES) is important as the technology approaches commercialization. Such knowledge can help adjust the design and deployment of an AWES to fit locals' needs better, thereby decreasing the technology's burden on people. Although the AWE literature claims that the technology affects nature and residents less than wind turbines, empirical evidence has been lacking. This first community acceptance study recruited residents within a 3.5 km radius of an AWE test site in Northern Germany. Using structured questionnaires, 54 residents rated the AWES and the closest wind farm on visual, sound, safety, siting, environmental, and ecological aspects. Contrary to the literature's claims, residents assessed the noise, ecological, and safety impacts similarly for the AWES and the wind farm. Only visual impacts were rated better for the AWES (e.g., no shadows were perceived). Consistent with research on wind turbines, residents who rated the site operation as fairer and the developer as more transparent tended to have more positive attitudes towards the AWES and to experience less noise annoyance. Consequently, recommendations for the AWE industry and policymakers include mitigating technology impacts and implementing evidence-based strategies to ensure just and effective project development. The findings are limited to one specific AWES using soft-wing kites. Future research should assess community responses across regions and different types of AWESs to test the findings' generalizability.
MULTIFILE
