979 resultados para IEEE titles


Relevância:

20.00% 20.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Includes index.

Relevância:

20.00% 20.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Mode of access: Internet.

Relevância:

20.00% 20.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Mode of access: Internet.

Relevância:

20.00% 20.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Kept up to date by supplements through 1963.

Relevância:

20.00% 20.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Mode of access: Internet.

Relevância:

20.00% 20.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Traditionally, some occupational titles have been explicitly marked for the gender of the group dominating the occupation. For example, in male-dominated occupations, titles often end with -man. However, since the second-wave feminist movement, several of the previously gender-biased titles have been supplemented by new, gender-neutral titles. Previous research has shown a discrepancy between researchers regarding the implications of these new titles. Some argue that the gender-neutral titles are only used for female referents, whereas others claim that gender-neutral titles, especially for male- dominated occupations, tend to still presuppose maleness. In the present paper, a corpus-based study is conducted on a few selected occupational titles. The aim is to investigate whether the gender-neutral alternatives have increased in usage over time, and whether the gender-biased ones have decreased. In addition, the study aims at examining whether the gender-neutral forms tend to be used primarily for women or men. The present study is corpus-based, examining the particular terms in the TIME Magazine Corpus. The results of the study show that there has been an increase of the gender-neutral forms since their introduction to English, and that they are primarily used when there is no explicit gender referencing. Proposed explanations for these results are that it may depend on the type of work involved in the selected occupations, as well as them being male-dominated. Furthermore, the results indicate that the gender- neutral terms are opted for when gender is either unknown or irrelevant for the context. 

Relevância:

20.00% 20.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

This study assessed the item validity of 15 of the physical demands from the Dictionary of Occupational Titles (DOT), as evaluated in a new approach to functional capacity evaluation (FCE) for clients with chronic back pain, the Gibson Approach to FCE (GAPP FCE). Fifty-two occupational therapists were sent the specifications of the items in the GAPP FCE procedures and were asked to rate the items in terms of item-objective congruence, relevance and difficulty. A response rate of 59.2% was obtained. The majority of the therapists agreed that most of the items were congruent with the objectives based on the definition of the physical demands from the DOT. The items evaluating Balancing and Pushing and Pulling had the lowest item-objective congruence. The evaluation of Balancing and the Lifting, Carrying and Pushing and Pulling of loads greater than light-medium weight (10–16 kg) were not considered significantly relevant. Concerns were raised about the difficulty and safety of the evaluation of Lifting, Carrying and Pushing and Pulling with clients with chronic back pain, particularly if the therapist evaluates the manual handling of medium to heavy loads. These results may have implications for other FCEs, particularly those which are based on the DOT, or when assessing clients with chronic back pain.