| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
153622
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Armed Forces & Society (AF&S) was founded in 1974 with the overall intention of creating an international arena for interdisciplinary approaches to the study of the military institution and the intersection of armed forces and their society. The present study is both a follow-up and an update of Morten Enders’s article “Authorship and Affiliation in Armed Forces & Society” covering 1,139 articles in the 41 volumes published from 1974 until 2015. The scope has been to look for the evolving trends on Authorship and Affiliation (A&A) within AF&S so as to say something about what AF&S has become over these years, as a consequence of whom the authors are and where they come from. Our findings suggest a developmental narrative of A&A in AF&S of a continuously higher author–article ratio, an increased female authorship ratio, and a wider range of disciplines from more continents, countries, and institutions, plus a trend of increased cross-national coauthorship.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
086006
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2009.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The purpose of this study is to explore the relationship between the secret negotiations and the public rhetoric of Palestinian and Israeli leaders leading up to the Oslo I Accords. To accomplish this goal, we coded public statements made by Israeli and Palestinian leaders in the months preceding the accords and the events that unfolded during the talks. We hypothesized that the Palestinian leaders, as nonstate actors, would engage in outbidding by showing a more aggressive, backward-looking orientation in public. Israeli leaders, as state actors, would engage in frontstage-backstage behavior and display a more balanced public rhetoric. The results showed that the Palestinians focused on justice issues framed as mistrust and backward looking. This public framing was associated with retreat in the private talks. In contrast, the Israelis switched between positively and negatively framed rhetoric with forward-looking and affiliative statements correlated with lack of progress and backward-looking and mistrust rhetoric associated with progress in the talks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|