Influence of credibility, warnings, and source-monitoring questions on the misinformation effect.

Introduction. Erroneous answers in studies on the misinformation effect (ME) can be reduced in different ways. In some studies, ME was reduced by SM questions, warnings, or a low credibility of the source of post-event information (PEI). Results are inconsistent, however. Of course, a participant can deliberately decide to refrain from reporting a critical item only when the difference between the original event and the PEI is distinguishable in principle. We were interested in the question to what extent the influence of erroneous information on a central aspect of the original event can be reduced by different means applied singly or in combination. Method. With a 2 (credibility; high vs. low) x 2 (warning; present vs. absent) between subjects design and an additional control group that received neither misinformation nor a warning (N = 116), we examined the above-mentioned factors’ influence on the ME. Participants viewed a short video of a robbery. The critical item suggested in the PEI was that the victim was given a kick by the perpetrator (which he was actually not). The memory test consisted of a two-forced-choice recognition test followed by a SM test. Results. To our surprise, neither a main effect of erroneous PEI nor a main effect of credibility was found. The error rates for the critical item in the control group (50%) as well as in the high (65%) and low (52%) credibility condition without warning did not significantly differ. A warning about possible misleading information in the PEI significantly reduced the influence of misinformation in both credibility conditions by 32-37%. Using a SM question significantly reduced the error rate too, but only in the high credibility no warning condition. Conclusion and Future Research. Our results show that, contrary to a warning or the use of a SM question, low source credibility did not reduce the ME. The most striking finding was, however, the absence of a main effect of erroneous PEI. Due to the high error rate in the control group, we suspect that the wrong answers might have been caused either by the response format (recognition test) or by autosuggestion possibly promoted by the high schema-consistency of the critical item. First results of a post-study in which we used open-ended questions before the recognition test support the former assumption. Results of a replication of this study using open-ended questions prior to the recognition test will be available by June.

‘Idolatry’ and Religious Diversity: Thinking about the Other in Early Modern Europe

Idolatry is a key concept in the history of Western thinking about religion, as an all-encompassing category in which all religions more or less alien to the Christian tradition could be subsumed. From Late Antiquity to the Modern period, we can follow how the notion was put to work within Christian discourse to think about the religious “other. ” In fact, the word is almost ubiquitous in pre-modern debates on religion and the origins of religion. Theories on the nature and causes of “idolatry” framed much of the issue of “Religion” vs. the “religions,” and largely provided the conceptual space, in early modern Europe, in which religious anthropology would emerge. The present paper will investigate some aspects of the early modern discourse on idolatry, and its place in early modern discussions on the “diversity” of religions.

Strategy and Action Plan for Sustainable Land Management in the High Pamir and Pamir-Alai Mountains

This Strategy and Action Plan was written within the framework of the project on Sustainable Land Management in the High Pamir and Pamir-Alai Mountains (PALM). PALM is an integrated transboundary initiative of the governments of the Kyrgyz Republic and the Republic of Tajikistan. It aims to address the interlinked problems of land degradation and poverty within a region that is one of Central Asia’s crucial sources of freshwater and a location of biodiversity hotspots. The project is executed by the Committee on Environment Protection in Tajikistan and the National Center for Mountain Regions Development in Kyrgyzstan, with fi nancial support from the Global Environment Facility (GEF) and other donors. The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) is the GEF Implementing Agency for the project, and the United Nations University (UNU) is the International Executing Agency. This Strategy and Action Plan integrates the work of three main teams of experts, namely the Pamir-Alai Transboundary Strategy and Action Plan (PATSAP) team, the Legal Task Forces, and a team of Natural Disaster Risk specialists. The PATSAP team was coordinated by the Centre for Development and Environment (CDE), University of Bern, Switzerland. The Legal Task Force was led by the Australian Centre for Agriculture and Law of the University of New England (UNE), and responsibility for the Natural Disaster Risk assessment was with the Central- Asian Institute of Applied Geosciences (CAIAG) in Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan. The development of the strategy took place from June 2009 to October 2010. The activities included fi eld study tours for updating the information base with fi rst-hand information from the local level, coordination meetings with actors from the region, and two multi-level stakeholder forums conducted in Khorog and Osh to identify priorities and to collect ideas for concrete action plans. The baseline information collected for the Strategy and Action Plan has been compiled by the experts and made available as reports1. A joint multi-level stakeholder forum was conducted in Jirgitol, Tajikistan, for in-depth discussion of the transboundary aspects. In August 2010, the draft Strategy and Action Plan was distributed among local, national, and international actors for consultation, and their comments were discussed at feedback forums in Khorog and Bishkek. This Strategy and Action Plan is intended as a recommendation. Nevertheless, it proposes concrete mechanisms for implementing the proposed sustainable land management (SLM) activities: The Regional Natural Resources Governance Framework provides the legal and policy concepts, principles, and regulatory requirements needed to create an enabling environment for SLM in the High Pamir and Pamir-Alai region at the transboundary, national, and local levels. The priority directions outlined provide a framework for the elaboration of rayon-level strategies and for strategies on specifi c topics (forestry, livestock, etc.), as well as for further development of government programmes and international projects. The action plans may serve as a pool of concrete ideas, which can be taken up by diff erent institutions and in smaller or larger projects. Finally, this document provides a basis for the elaboration and signing of targeted cooperation agreements on land use and management between the leaders of Osh oblast (Kyrgyz Republic), Gorno Badakhshan Autonomous Oblast, and Jirgitol rayon (Republic of Tajikistan).

Labour Migration, Trade and Investment: From Fragmentation to Coherence

Trade, investment and migration are strongly intertwined, being three key factors in international production. Yet, law and regulation of the three has remained highly fragmented. Trade is regulated by the WTO on the multilateral level, and through preferential trade agreements on the regional and bilateral levels – it is fragmented and complex in its own right. Investment, on the other hand, is mainly regulated through bilateral investment treaties with no strong links to the regulation of trade or migration. And, finally, migration is regulated by a web of different international, regional and bilateral agreements which focus on a variety of different aspects of migration ranging from humanitarian to economic. The problems of institutional fragmentation in international law are well known. There is no organizational forum for coherent strategy-making on the multilateral level covering all three areas. Normative regulations may thus contradict each other. Trade regulation may bring about liberalization of access for service providers, but eventually faces problems in recruiting the best people from abroad. Investors may withdraw investment without being held liable for disruptions to labour and to the livelihood and infrastructure of towns and communities affected by disinvestment. Finally, migration policies do not seem to have a significant impact as long as trade policies and investment policies are not working in a way that is conducive to reducing migration pressure, as trade and investment are simply more powerful on the regulatory level than migration. This chapter addresses the question as to how fragmentation of the three fields could be reme-died and greater coherence between these three areas of factor allocation in international economic relations and law could be achieved. It shows that migration regulation on the international level is lagging behind that on trade and investment. Stronger coordination and consideration of migration in trade and investment policy, and stronger international cooperation in migration, will provide the foundations for a coherent international architecture in the field.