Opin vísindi
Opin vísindi er varðveislusafn vísindaefnis og doktorsritgerða í opnum aðgangi á vegum íslenskra háskóla og Landsbókasafns Íslands - Háskólabókasafns.
Opinn aðgangur að rannsóknaniðurstöðum er í samræmi við 10. gr. laga nr. 3/2003 um opinberan stuðning við vísindarannsóknir sem og kröfur innlendra og erlendra rannsóknasjóða. Markmiðið með opnum aðgangi er að niðurstöður rannsókna séu aðgengilegar sem flestum óhindrað og án endurgjalds á rafrænu formi. Vistun í varðveislusafninu er varanleg og ætlað að tryggja aðgang að vísindaefni íslenskra háskóla í opnum aðgangi um ókomna tíð. Varðveislusafnið Opin vísindi er tengt við rannsóknagáttina IRIS og rannsóknaniðurstöður í opnum aðgangi sem eru skráðar í IRIS eru um leið vistaðar og gerðar aðgengilegar til framtíðar í varðveislusafninu. Með því að safna þessu efni saman í eitt safn verður aðgangur að því einfaldur og þægilegur fyrir alla sem vilja kynna sér það og geta þannig notið þess öfluga vísindastarfs sem fram fer í háskólum landsins.
Varðveislusafnið er OpenAIRE / OpenAIREplus samhæft og samrýmist kröfum sem gerðar eru um birtingu rannsóknaniðurstaðna úr verkefnum sem styrkt eru úr evrópsku rannsóknaáætlununum FP7 og H2020.
Varðveislusafnið notar opna hugbúnaðinn DSpace.
Opinn aðgangur að rannsóknaniðurstöðum er í samræmi við 10. gr. laga nr. 3/2003 um opinberan stuðning við vísindarannsóknir sem og kröfur innlendra og erlendra rannsóknasjóða. Markmiðið með opnum aðgangi er að niðurstöður rannsókna séu aðgengilegar sem flestum óhindrað og án endurgjalds á rafrænu formi. Vistun í varðveislusafninu er varanleg og ætlað að tryggja aðgang að vísindaefni íslenskra háskóla í opnum aðgangi um ókomna tíð. Varðveislusafnið Opin vísindi er tengt við rannsóknagáttina IRIS og rannsóknaniðurstöður í opnum aðgangi sem eru skráðar í IRIS eru um leið vistaðar og gerðar aðgengilegar til framtíðar í varðveislusafninu. Með því að safna þessu efni saman í eitt safn verður aðgangur að því einfaldur og þægilegur fyrir alla sem vilja kynna sér það og geta þannig notið þess öfluga vísindastarfs sem fram fer í háskólum landsins.
Varðveislusafnið er OpenAIRE / OpenAIREplus samhæft og samrýmist kröfum sem gerðar eru um birtingu rannsóknaniðurstaðna úr verkefnum sem styrkt eru úr evrópsku rannsóknaáætlununum FP7 og H2020.
Varðveislusafnið notar opna hugbúnaðinn DSpace.
Nýlega bætt við
Philosophical Foundations of Precedent
(Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2023-01-01) Endicott, Timothy; Kristjánsson, Hafsteinn Dan; Lewis, Sebastian; Department of Law
Philosophical Foundations of Precedent offers a broad, deep, and diverse range of philosophical investigations of the role of precedent in law, adjudication, and morality. The forty chapters present the work of a large and inclusive group of forty-three authors-established contributors and new voices in legal philosophy. The book addresses the nature and authority of precedent and the forms of reasoning that it involves in common law and civil law systems. It also addresses fundamental principles as to how and when to act in accordance with precedent, as well as reasons for which it may be best to depart from precedent.
Introduction : The Central Question and Its Ramifications
(Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2023-01-01) Endicott, Timothy; Kristjánsson, Hafsteinn Dan; Lewis, Sebastian; Department of Law
This Introduction sets the scene for the forty chapters of Philosophical Foundations of Precedent, pointing out reasons for the range and the depth of the investigations offered in the book. The central question concerning precedent in law is: why should a judicial decision today depend on what a court decided in the past? Any answer to that question generates a tension between the putative value of following previous decisions, and the value of readiness to reform the law. This book offers a broad array of philosophical investigations into the central question and the central tension, and into the variety of ways in which the fact of an earlier decision may be treated as a reason for decision in later cases. The book addresses the nature and authority of precedent and of the forms of reasoning that it involves in common law and civil law systems, and addresses fundamental principles as to how and when to act in accordance with precedent. The Introduction explains the way in which the project of the book emerged as a collaborative, collegial enterprise among a large and inclusive group of established contributors and new voices in legal philosophy.
Elements of Precedent
(Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2023-01-01) Kristjánsson, Hafsteinn Dan; Department of Law
The chapter provides a general analysis for all legal systems of the roles that precedents play in determining a legal norm according to the legal method. It argues that some precedents are ‘independent’ sources of law in the sense that they are identified by a norm of recognition (relatively) independently of how the ‘underlying source’ was treated. These precedents become sources even if they were wrongly decided according to the legal method in the jurisdiction. Common law precedents in England may be examples of this. Contrariwise, some precedents are a ‘dependent’ source of law. These precedents count as sources if a court has identified the law used to decide the case according to the legal method in the jurisdiction. A precedent that is wrongly decided is not recognized as a source of law. Perhaps this is the case in some civil law jurisdictions. The chapter argues that precedents can be sources of law even though there is no norm of change empowering a court to create law. It is enough that the precedent is identified as a source by a norm of recognition. Moreover, the chapter argues that norms of institutional decision-making, such as norms of adjudication, matter for understanding the legal effects of precedent. It suggests that stare decisis is best understood as an institutional duty imposed on particular institutions, that is courts, to follow past decisions but not a norm of recognition. This view allows for different mixtures of norms of recognition and institutional duties in different legal systems.
СРАВНИТЕЛЬНЫЙ АНАЛИЗ НОВОГО СЛОВАРЯ ДЕСКРИПТОРОВ ЛИЧНОСТИ С ТЕЗАУРУСОМ ЛИЧНОСТНЫХ ЧЕРТ А.Г. ШМЕЛЕВА
(2023) Kalugin, Alexey Yu; Shchebetenko, Sergei A.; Mishkevich, Arina M.; Sirotina, Ulyana E.; Vitko, Yulia S.; Sálfræðideild
We compared a new Russian dictionary of personality descriptors with the thesaurus of personality traits by Alexander Shmelev and his colleagues developed in the 1980s and 1990s. In the new dictionary, the descriptors were selected from the Open Corpus, a global Russian word collection which had included over 140,000 adjectives, nouns, verbs, and adverbs. We utilized a “German methodology” of the word selection which comprises a three-stage process; in so doing, we consecutively yielded a full (2,384 words) and abridged (1,253 words) dictionaries of the personality descriptors, with cognate synonyms and antonyms being removed from the latter. While developing the full dictionary, we engaged groups of experts who varied in their age, sex, and expertise, in amounts from 6 to 45 experts per group. In the full dictionary, full equivalents to contents of the Shmelev’s thesaurus were found for 624 words, whereas 1,353 words present in the Shmelev’s thesaurus were excluded (the reasons for it are discussed in the paper). From the Shmelev’s thesaurus, 109 words were absent in our initial 140,000 list, whereas 629 words in our dictionaries were absent in the Shmelev’s thesaurus. Overall, the Shmelev’s thesaurus was 26.2% equal to our full dictionary and 49.8% to the abridged dictionary. These differences do not imply different findings to be potentially revealed between the dictionaries, as the content of core personality characteristics can remain the same over the dictionaries. Consequently, estimations of the global Russian personality trait structure using either dictionary could closely fit. Conversely, the methodology of including or excluding descriptors in the particular dictionary could explain why the structures of personality were different.
Preliminary impact of the adoption of the Icelandic Prevention Model in Tarragona City, 2015–2019 : A repeated cross-sectional study
(2023) Meyers, Caine C.A.; Mann, Michael J.; Thorisdottir, Ingibjorg Eva; Ros Garcia, Patricia; Sigfusson, Jon; Sigfusdottir, Inga Dora; Kristjansson, Alfgeir L.; Department of Psychology
Background: There is a great need for effective primary prevention intervention strategies to reduce and delay onset of adolescent substance use. The Icelandic Prevention Model (IPM) showed great success in Iceland over the past twenty plus years, however, evidence for the transferability of model is still somewhat limited. Using data collected in Tarragona during regional efforts to begin adoption of the IPM in Catalonia, this study tested the transferability and stability of the core risk and protective factor assumptions of the IPM overtime and examined trends of lifetime smoking, e-cigarette-use, alcohol-use, intoxication, and cannabis-use within the same time period. Methods: This study includes responses from 15- to 16-years-olds from two region-wide samples taken in 2015 and 2019 in Tarragona (N = 2,867). Survey questions assessed frequency of lifetime: smoking, e-cigarette-use, alcohol-use, intoxication, and cannabis-use, and the core model assumptions. Demographic data were also collected. Logistic regression models of main effects with and without time interaction were used to test assumptions and their stability across time. Chi-square tests and Wilcoxon–Mann–Whitney U tests were used to compare prevalence of substance use and mean scores of primary prevention variables respectively. Results: Lifetime: smoking (−7%, p < 0.001) and cannabis-use (−4%, p < 0.001) decreased, and e-cigarette-use increased (+33%, p < 0.001) in Tarragona. Lifetime intoxication (−7%, p < 0.001) decreased in a single zone exclusively. Most core model assumptions held in their hypothesised direction across time. The strongest positive association was observed between time spent with parents during weekends and reduced odds of lifetime smoking (OR: 0.62, 95%CI: 0.57–0.67) and the strongest negative association was observed between being outside after midnight and increased odds of lifetime intoxication (OR: 1.41, 95%CI: 1.32–1.51). Mean scores of primary prevention variables also changed disproportionately in Tarragona. Conclusion: This study confirms that the core IPM assumptions are similar in Tarragona as in Iceland and other contexts previously examined. They also indicate that prevalence of lifetime smoking, intoxication, and cannabis-use decreased disproportionately in Tarragona between 2015 and 2019 during the first phase of regional adoption of the model. Thus, targeting model assumptions represents a viable primary prevention strategy for communities that hope to reduce smoking, alcohol-use, intoxication, and cannabis-use among adolescents.
Flokkar í Opnum vísindum
Veldu flokk til að skoða.
- University of Iceland
- University of Akureyri
- Bifröst University
- Hólar University College
- IRIS
- Agricultural University of Iceland
- National and University Library of Iceland
- Iceland University of the Arts