The present study explored motivations for lying self-presentation on Instagram as well as the mental and behavioral outcomes of this presentation. We also examined the differential mediational roles of perceived popularity in accounting for the association between lying self-presentation and depression. Our results showed that individuals with a strong need for approval reported higher levels of lying self-presentation. The results also revealed that lying self-presentation positively influenced depression, perceived popularity and deleting behaviors. Furthermore, we found that even if lying self-presentation (...) increased depression, perceived popularity served as a psychological buffer against depression. (shrink)

1. Chŏngch'i ch'ŏrhak kwa chŏngsin punsŏkhak ŭi mannam -- 2. Han'gugin ŭi chamjae ŭisik kwa chŏngch'i pyŏngni.

The purpose of this study was to examine how young publics in the United States and South Korea perceive the corporate social responsibility (CSR) practices of multinational corporations and evaluate the effectiveness of CSR practices in terms of organization–public relationship (OPR). Results showed that young publics in the United States and South Korea differently characterized CSR practices of multinational corporations and evaluated relationships with them. Young American participants evaluated the CSR practices of multinational corporations more favorably than did the young (...) Korean participants. In addition, four CSR practices (internal environment, moral, discretionary, and relational) were associated with OPR dimensions in the United States, while only relational CSR practices were significantly related to OPR dimensions in South Korea. Overall, the findings highlight that cultural and societal meanings were embedded in identifying CSR practices and evaluating the relationship with multinational corporations involved in CSR practices. (shrink)

보존이란 인간의 활동을 규제해서라도 야생자연이나 생물종을 있는 그대로 지켜야 한다는 사고다. 하지만 패스모어는 인간이 문명의 건설 · 발전을 위해 야생지를 개발하고 생물을 멸종시키는 현 상황이 대체 무슨 문제가 되는가 하는 물음을 제기한다. 야생지 개발과 생물종 파괴가 잘못이라는 판단에 대한 합의는 전혀 이뤄진 적이 없음에도 마치 일정한 합의가 이뤄진 것처럼 보존만이 옳은 것처럼 강조하는 이유가 대체 무엇인가 하는 것이다. 이러한 문제의식 하에 패스모어는 보존에 반대하는 논증을 전개한다. 이 글에서는 패스모어의 보존에 관한 논의 가운데 세 가지 사항을 문제삼아 그 정당성을 검토하고 있다. (...) 그 세 가지란 ①보전과 보존의 개념 문제, ②동식물의 권리 문제, 그리고 ③생물다양성의 원리 문제다. (shrink)

1. Chŏngch'i ch'ŏrhak kwa chŏngsin punsŏkhak ŭi mannam -- 2. Han'gugin ŭi chamjae ŭisik kwa chŏngch'i pyŏngni.

This study analyzed the sensitivity between fund flow and fund performance with Korean funds, whether there would be a difference in the sensitivity between environmental, social and governance funds and non-ESG funds, and whether there was a difference in sensitivity according to the type of past fund performance. The main results of the analysis are as follows. First, the analysis of the fund flow–performance correlation of Korean funds revealed that they had a negative correlation and the ESG did not affect (...) fund flow. Analysis of the difference in sensitivity between fund flow and performance volatility revealed that there was a negative correlation regardless of the performance measuring method and ESG. Finally, the comparison of fund flow and performance sensitivity according to the type of past fund performance revealed that despite consistent asymmetry, there was little difference in sensitivity asymmetry between ESG funds and non-ESG funds. The results reveal that, unlike the expectation that investors in Korean ESG funds would focus more on non-financial properties like the purpose of investment than on profit, they attach the same importance to fund performance. (shrink)

The principle of fairness holds that individuals (beneficiaries) who benefit from a cooperative scheme of others (cooperators) have an obligation to do their share in return for their benefit. The original proponent of this principle, H. L. A. Hart suggests ‘mutuality of restrictions’ as a moral basis because it is fair to mutually restrict the freedom of both beneficiaries and cooperators; so called the fairness obligation. This paper explores ‘mutuality of restrictions’, which is interpreted as a right-based and an equality-based (...) justification of the fairness obligation. It is not argued whether both ways of justifying the obligation makes a success, but that they are in need of presupposing that there is a duty for beneficiaries to do their share in return for their benefit. This suggests turning to a duty-based justification of the fairness obligation. (shrink)

Part 1. Yi Saek ŭi segyegwan kwa yŏksa ŭisik -- part 2. Kwŏn Kŭn ŭi segyegwan kwa yŏksa ŭisik.