A NETWORK ANALYSIS OF TOURISM RESEARCH

This paper uses network analysis to identify the pioneering scholars and seminal works which have influenced recent papers in leading journals. The analysis extends beyond rankings of scholars by using co-citation networks to visualize the relationships between the most influential scholars and works and to uncover the disciplinary contributions which have supported the emergence of tourism as a field of academic study. The networks of scholars and works illuminate invisible colleges, tribes and territories in tourism research and indicate that while the social sciences have been most influential, business-related citations are increasing. The findings contribute to the discourse about the epistemology of tourism research by using bibliometric techniques to offer insights into the interdisciplinary structure of tourism research.     

Does firm performance reveal its own causes? the role of Bayesian inference

A central problem in strategic management is how the inference ‘sustainable competitive advantage generates sustainable superior performance’ can be put into practice. In this article we develop a theoretical framework to understand the causal relationships among (1) sustainable competitive advantage, (2) configuration, (3) dynamic capability, and (4) sustainable superior performance. We propose that a firm's competitive advantage, resource bundle configuration, and dynamic learning capability cannot be comprehended by outsiders. Its operational performance, however, can be captured by financial indicators. We promote an inductive Bayesian interpretation of the sustainable competitive advantage proposition. From this viewpoint, the presence or absence of competitive advantage may be reflected in the causal relationship between resource configuration, dynamic capability, and observable financial performance. We apply this theoretical framework to an example drawn from the global semiconductor industry, an area in which resource configuration and dynamic capability are essential to performance. The paper concludes with a summary of the proposed model and suggestions for future theoretical development of strategic management. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Knowledge Types in Technology

Starting with the distinction of natural science, engineering science ("technology") and engineering practice ("technics"), the paper will stress the difference between technological and technical knowledge. The first part will discuss the relationship between science and technology, arguing that technology is a genuine type of knowledge rather than "applied science". In technics, however, even technological laws, as transformations of scientific laws, cover a certain part of knowledge only. The greater part of technical knowledge includes technical know-how, functional rules, structural rules, and socio-technological understanding, which is just developing in our times. The classification of knowledge types will be used for determining which kind of knowledge may seem appropriate to general technological education.     

Some Implications of the Philosophy of Technology for Science, Technology and Society (STS) Studies

Technology is frequently considered in terms of its impact on entities outside its essential nature: as the impact of technology on the environment and society, but also the impact of human values and needs on technology. By taking particular social implications of technology into account, the Science–Technology relationship can be extended to the field of Science, Technology and Society (STS) studies. STS studies are grounded in socio-technological understanding, that is, systematic knowledge of the mutual relationship between technical objects, the natural environment and social practice. Because technology is a key element of STS, it is expected that the philosophy of technology will have implications for STS studies. The dynamic nature of technology as such leaves its own philosophy in a tentative or flexible state. However, the implications of the philosophy of technology, being in a development phase at the moment with changes in emphasis occuring, for STS studies ought to be determined continuously. The aim of the article is to identify and discuss possible implications of the the philosophy of technology for STS. In order to deduce these implications, the relevant theoretical framework underpinning the article will be discussed in broad outlines. Seeing that the philosophy of technology is such a wide field a delineation of the field needs to be done. Mitcham’s proposed preliminary framework is taken as point of departure for the article. Technology as knowledge (epistemology/theory of knowledge) and technology as activity (design methodology) will be discussed as two key aspects of the modern philosophy of technology which could provide implications for STS. A theory of knowledge usually includes methodology, but seeing that Mitcham classified methodology as one of the modes in which technology is manifested, it is dealt with separately. The epistemology and methodology of technology will each be discussed from a philosophical, historical and practice-based methodological perspective. Some implications of the philosophy for STS are identified and discussed.     

Reasoning about knowledge of unawareness

Awareness has been shown to be a useful addition to standard epistemic logic. However, standard propositional logics for knowledge and awareness cannot express the fact that an agent knows that there are facts of which he is unaware without there being an explicit fact that the agent knows he is unaware of. We extend Fagin and Halpern's logic of general awareness to a logic that allows quantification over variables, so that there is a formula in the language that says “an agent explicitly knows that there exists a fact of which he is unaware.” Moreover, that formula can be true without the agent explicitly knowing that he is unaware of any particular formula. We provide a sound and complete axiomatization of the logic. Finally, we show that the validity problem for the logic is recursively enumerable, but not decidable.     

From data problems to questions about sources: elements towards an institutional analysis of population-level organisational change. The case of British building societies, 1845–1980

Abstract

Institutional analyses of population-level organisational change seem particularly well suited to the task of further incorporating historical concerns into organisational theory, as has been advocated by a growing number of authors, both within business history and management and organisation studies. Such an approach has been applied, in particular, to studies of shifts in organisational forms within the early-twentieth-century US thrift industry. The aim of this article, building on the case study of British building societies during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, is to uncover both the promises and the limitations of this approach in terms of historical epistemology and methodology, and suggest ways to further consolidate the historical grounding of similar approaches to organisational change. In particular, detailed attention paid to sources and to periodisation may point towards improvements in methodology, both within historical institutionalism and neo-institutionalist history.     

费尔巴哈哲学对马克思“新唯物主义”哲学认识论的启示

费尔巴哈哲学认识论将人类的哲学视野从宗教的天国下降到现实的人间,开启了唯物主义的认识论路线。但其以感性直观的反映论理解对象世界,没有将唯物主义贯彻到社会历史领域,终而陷入唯心史观。马克思“新唯物主义”认识论则以人的感性实践活动为出发点,将感性认识上升为理性认识,来认识对象事物的表象和本质,理解社会存在和社会意识的辩证关系,找到了人类社会历史发展演进的规律,创立了唯物主义历史观。费尔巴哈哲学对马克思“新唯物主义”哲学认识论的启示主要表现在从感性直观到理性认识、从直观反映论到实践认识论、从个体存在和类意识到社会存在和社会意识等方面。     

中国旅游研究的方法论批判

中国旅游研究正面临思想和理论创新滞后的窘境,对旅游哲学和方法论的忽视是主要原因。旅游研究的哲学困境有其历史根源,方法论层面缺乏深刻省思和批判争鸣是其关键原因。当前,中国旅游研究的问题主要表现为两个"过度"和三个"缺失":研究主题过度政策和行业导向,研究范式过度实证主义倾向;对旅游问题的社会根源反思缺失,旅游研究的批判性思维缺失,旅游思想史和方法论研究缺失。需要对旅游、旅游业和旅游研究三者的关系进行深入研究,将旅游所涉及三个基本层面:个体性、社会性和经济性进行统合思考。基于旅游研究的跨学科特征以及旅游与生活的密切关联,重构旅游研究理论的路径有三个:首先,必须唤醒学科的理论意识,并重塑旅游学科的相对独立性;其次,需要注重旅游思想史研究,并鼓励方法论争鸣,形成旅游学本体论、认识论和方法论的谱系;最后,注重理论和实践的相互转化,推进旅游、旅游业与旅游研究的辩证统一,实现精神的自由、社会的交流和学术的独立。