Intuitionistic common knowledge or belief

Starting off from the usual language of modal logic for multi-agent systems dealing with the agents’ knowledge/belief and common knowledge/belief we define so-called epistemic Kripke structures for intu- itionistic (common) knowledge/belief. Then we introduce corresponding deductive systems and show that they are sound and complete with respect to these semantics.

An examination of the link between just world belief and schadenfreude

Schadenfreude is a pleasure derived from someone else’s misfortune. Just world belief is a desire to belief that people get what they deserve and deserve what they get (Lerner, 1965,1980). Interestingly, previous scholars documented the link between schadenfreude, responsibility and deservingness (e.g. van Dijk, Goslinga, & Ouwerkerk, 2008), i.e. the more failure is deserved, the more perceived responsibility for the failure, and subsequently more schadenfreude is evoked. Thus, the present study tested if a threat of a just world belief intensifies experience of schadenfreude. The participants (N=48, 31 women and 17 men, M age = 23.72), were randomly assigned to one of two experimental conditions (just world belief: threat versus no-threat) between-participant design. They read scenarios which were designed to threaten or maintain their just world belief. Next, they were transferred to an online magazine presenting funny stories about other peoples’ failures. The stories were selected in a pilot study in order to evoke schadenfreude. As presumed, the participants exposed to the threat of just world belief experienced more schadenfreude, i.e. spent more time on reading schadenfreude stories. The results confirmed the existence of a link between just world threat and schadenfreude.

Schadenfreude and just world belief

The present study tested the hypothesis that a threat of a just world belief intensifies experience of schadenfreude (i.e., pleasure at another's misfortune). The participants read scenarios which were designed to threaten or maintain their just world belief. Subsequently, they were transferred to an online magazine presenting funny stories about other peoples' failures. As presumed, the participants exposed to the threat of just world belief spent more time on reading. These results confirmed the existence of a link between just world threat and schadenfreude.

Beyond belief : Strategic taboos and organizational identity in strategic agenda setting

A comprehensive strategic agenda matters for fundamental strategic change. Our study seeks to explore and theorize how organizational identity beliefs influence the judgment of strategic actors when setting an organization's strategic agenda. We offer the notion of "strategic taboo" as those strategic options initially disqualified and deemed inconsistent with the organizational identity beliefs of strategic actors. Our study is concerned with how strategic actors confront strategic taboos in the process of setting an organization's strategic agenda. Based on a revelatory inductive case study, we find that strategic actors engage in assessing the concordance of the strategic taboos with organizational identity beliefs and, more specifically, that they focus on key identity elements (philosophy; priorities; practices) when doing so. We develop a typology of three reinterpretation practices that are each concerned with a key identity element. While contextualizing assesses the potential concordance of a strategic taboo with an organization's overall philosophy and purpose, instrumentalizing assesses such concordance with respect to what actors deem an organization's priorities to be. Finally, normalizing explores concordance with respect to compatibility and fit with the organization's practices. We suggest that assessing concordance of a strategic taboo with identity elements consists in reinterpreting collective identity beliefs in ways that make them consistent with what organizational actors deem the right course of action. This article discusses the implications for theory and research on strategic agenda setting, strategic change, a practice-based perspective on strategy, and on organizational identity.

Propagation of Behavioral Variations with Delegation Proxies

Scoping behavioral variations to dynamic extents is useful to support non-functional concerns that otherwise result in cross-cutting code. Unfortunately, such forms of scoping are difficult to obtain with traditional reflection or aspects. We propose delegation proxies, a dynamic proxy model that supports behavioral intercession through the interception of various interpretation operations. Delegation proxies permit different behavioral variations to be easily composed together. We show how delegation proxies enable behavioral variations that can propagate to dynamic extents. We demonstrate our approach with examples of behavioral variations scoped to dynamic extents that help simplify code related to safety, reliability, and monitoring.