Refine
Document Type
- Doctoral Thesis (2)
- Part of Periodical (2)
- Article (1)
Language
- English (5) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (5)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (5)
Keywords
- Diversität (5) (remove)
Institute
- Geowissenschaften (1)
- Psychologie (1)
The construct diversity describes the collective amount of differences among members within a social unit. The present dissertation is based on the assumption that, through engagement with diversity, people acquire an understanding of what role diversity plays in the societies, organizations, work groups, or other social units they are part of. This understanding of the role diversity plays in a given social unit provides a vantage point from which people will engage with diversity in the future. These vantage points from which people engage with diversity are the general subject matter of the present dissertation. Two main research questions are addressed in this regard: First, whether the role diversity is given in a particular context does have effects on groups and the individual members therein. Second, if such effects exist, it seeks to explore the processes and mechanisms they are based on. Both questions are addressed from different perspectives in the three main chapters of this dissertation. Chapter 5 contains two meta-analyses on the effects of diversity beliefs and diversity climates. Diversity beliefs are individual attitudes that describe the degree to which diversity is ascribed an instrumental value for achieving beneficial outcomes or avoiding detrimental ones. Diversity climates depict such a value of diversity on the group-level. Building on the social identity approach, I explain how diversity beliefs and climates can obviate diversity’s detrimental effects and foster beneficial ones. As both diversity beliefs and climates can cause such effects, they are considered together in the main analyses in the chapter. In the first part of the chapter, a meta-analysis on these moderator effects of diversity beliefs/climates is presented (k = 23). The majority of studies that addressed such effects reported significant results. The patterns of these results showed that, in general, diversity will be more positively related to beneficial outcomes the more it is valued. However, the analysis also revealed that there are at least two types of patterns of this moderation. So far, it cannot be explained which pattern will occur under what circumstances. In the second part of the chapter, a meta-analysis on the main effects of diversity beliefs/climates on beneficial outcomes is presented (k = 71). These effects did not receive much attention in the primary studies. Based on the social identity approach and the fact that diversity is a ubiquitous feature of modern organizations, I argue that they are important nonetheless. The meta-analysis revealed a significant positive main effect of diversity beliefs on beneficial outcomes (r = .25; p < .0001). However, the effect sizes varied considerably across studies. Both moderator and main effects were found across a broad array of outcomes, study designs, levels of analysis, and operationalizations of the constructs involved. They were found irrespective of whether diversity beliefs or diversity climates were considered. The heterogeneity of results in the meta-analyses suggests that there is still much to be learned about when differences in vantage points from which people engage with diversity will have an effect and about the processes that underlie these effects. Chapter 6 is, therefore, predominantly concerned with these underlying processes. Most of the previous research has treated pro-diversity beliefs and pro-similarity beliefs as opposite poles of one underlying continuum. There is, however, evidence that people can hold both types of beliefs simultaneously. Therefore, I propose that both diversity in certain aspects and similarity in other aspects can simultaneously constitute valid and valued parts of an organization’s identity, and that, hence, identifying with the organization can create two forms of solidarity among the employees: organic solidarity – based on meaningfully and synergistically interrelated differences, and mechanic solidarity – based on the common ground that all employees share. Furthermore, I propose that both forms of solidarity can coexist and that both are positively related to the quality of collaboration within the organization. Thus, organizational identification is proposed to influence quality of collaboration indirectly through both organic and mechanic solidarity. These propositions were tested with regard to the collaboration of different teams within two organizations: a German university (Study 1, N = 699) and a Taiwanese hospital (Study 2, N = 591). The results from both studies confirm the predictions. However, the relative importance of each form of solidarity varied across study contexts and across different facets of the quality of collaboration. Chapter 7 also builds on the findings from the meta-analyses and is again predominantly focussed on the processes underlying the effects of diversity beliefs and diversity climates, yet from a different angle. Previously, diversity beliefs and climates have often been discussed with regard to their potential to influence whether diversity will lead to more and deeper elaboration of information within the group. In chapter 7 a theoretical model is developed that complements these cognitive processes by addressing the emotional side of diverse groups. Central to the model is the assumption that group diversity can stimulate group members to engage with each other emotionally, resulting in higher levels of state affective empathy: an emotional state which arises from the comprehension and apprehension of fellow group members’ emotional state. State affective empathy, in turn, is known to lead to a variety of beneficial team processes that can ultimately enhance individual and group-level performance. Thus, the central proposition of the model is that the relationship between diversity and performance is mediated through state affective empathy. The other propositions in the model specify moderators that determine when diversity will indeed have this empathy-stimulating effect. Diversity beliefs and climates are considered second-order moderators that shape the relationship between diversity and empathy through their influence on the first-order moderators. In general, it is proposed that diversity is related to empathy more positively if it is valued by the group or its members. In summary, the results from the meta-analyses in chapter 5, the results from the field studies in chapter 6, and the theoretical arguments presented in chapter 7 can be interpreted such that differences in vantage points from which people engage with diversity can indeed affect groups and their members. Therefore, the first research question of the present dissertation can be answered affirmatively from three different perspectives. However, it also became clear that there is still much uncertainty about the mechanisms underlying these effects. In line with the second research question of the present dissertation, these mechanisms were examined more closely in chapter 6 and 7. The field studies in chapter 6 highlighted the role of identification as the driving force behind the effects of different vantage points on diversity. Furthermore, they also corroborate the proposition that valuing diversity and valuing similarity can be co-occurring phenomena that both influence the collaboration within the group positively. The theoretical model presented in chapter 7 opens up a new emotional way in which diversity beliefs and climates can influence whether diversity will lead to better or worse performance. In sum, therefore, also with regard to the second research question of the present dissertation, progress has been made.
The development of benthic foraminiferal assemblages during the past 6,000 yrs was investigated in Holocene sediment cores from three carbonate platforms (Turneffe Islands, Lighthouse Reef, and Glovers Reef) of Belize, Central America. Foraminiferal assemblages and their diversity were determined in different time periods to identify their dependence on environmental factors, such as lagoonal age, lagoonal depth, water circulation, substrate, bottom-water temperature, and salinity. Geochemical proxies (δ18O and δ13C), obtained from the common larger foraminifer Archaias angulatus were used to estimate Holocene seasonal BW-temperatures and climate variabilities. A total of 51 samples were taken from 12 vibracores for taxonomic determination and 10 to 15 subsamples of 32 tests of Archaias angulatus were used for stable oxygen and carbon isotope analyses. Based on cluster analyses, seven benthic foraminiferal assemblages are distinguished during the Holocene. The three platforms exhibit characteristic differences in benthic foraminiferal fauna and diversity, which are controlled by their respective environments during the last 6,000 yrs. Turneffe Islands has four benthic foraminiferal assemblages, which are typical for restricted lagoons with fluctuating salinity. Lighthouse Reef is inhabited by two benthic foraminifera associations, which are characteristic of high water exchange with the surrounding ocean and clear waters. Glovers Reef is characterized by two benthic foraminiferal assemblages, which occur in deeper lagoons with slow water circulation. In general, during the Holocene, the highest mean diversity, evenness, and richness of benthic foraminifera were found in the Turneffe Islands and the lowest occurred at Glovers Reef. The foraminiferal faunas of the Lighthouse and Glovers Reefs had been in a “Diversification Stage” since 6,000 yrs, whereas the foraminiferal fauna of the Turneffe Islands reflects the development from a “Colonisation” (~4,000 yrs BP) to a “Diversification Stage” (~2,000 yrs to present time). Lagoonal depth, water circulation, substrate, and BW-temperature have higher influence on foraminiferal diversity as compared to lagoonal size and age. The negative correlation between diversity and lagoonal depth is based on differences in light intensity and substrate. In contrast to Lighthouse Reef, the Turneffe Islands and Glovers Reef show decreasing diversity of benthic foraminifera with increasing lagoon depth, due to finer sediment, turbid waters and/or dense mangrove growth, which reduce the light intensity and the number of species. Water Circulation also affected the benthic foraminifera modes of living and their diversity during the last 6,000 yrs. Increasing abundances of infaunal taxa refer to restricted circulation and/or lower oxygen conditions, as assumed for the Turneffe Islands and Glovers Reef. Increasing abundances of epifaunal foraminifera, as observed in the Lighthouse Reef indicate better circulation and/or higher oxygen conditions. Holocene BW-temperature reconstructions based on δ18O of single Archaias angulatus tests do not correspond to typical Holocene climate models of the Caribbean. In the Belize area, mean BW-temperature trends indicate local climate variations. A decrease of δ13C values during the last 1,000 yrs could be related to the “Suess Effect”. The seasonal BW-temperature variations within single large benthic foraminifera tests correspond to present-day temperature fluctuations in the lagoons, and indicate higher temperatures in Summer and Autumn and lower temperatures in Winter and Spring.
Diverse museum diversities
(2018)
'Diversity' has become a lively key word in contemporary museum discourse and practice, with numerous policies and initiatives being conducted under its banner. Achieving 'diversity' is seen as something to be celebrated - a good thing in itself. But quite what 'diversity' refers to is itself heterogeneous, with this only rarely explicitly articulated or even recognised. As such, what exists is a shifting field of diverse diversities, which variously interlink and reinforce each other but which may also mask critical discrepancies, disconnects, incompatibilities and even contrary ambitions.
The current forest policy in Germany is to change forest monocultures into mixed forests. This is based on the assumption that monocultures are less robust against climatic influences (e.g. storm, drought), more susceptible to pest organisms (JACTEL et al. 2002, WOODS 2003, BURTON et al. 1992) and are for several insect taxa known to show a lower species richness in comparison to mixed forests (YOUNG 1986, BARKMAN 1992, BURKHART & THAM 1992, DENNIS 1997, BRAGANCA et al. 1998). This investigation wanted to verify this thesis in forests consisting of European beech (Fagus sylvatica), Norway spruce (Picea abies) and of both tree species. The area of investigation was in the Solling region, a large woodland in Lower Saxony (Germany).
First as a student of comparative literature with a focus on German and then as a professor of German Studies, I’ve been traveling back and forth to Germany for three decades, almost exactly the age of the reunified German state. I have stayed for weeks, for months, or for more than a year at a time. I have lived in Leipzig, in Cologne, and in Munich, but I have spent by far the most time in Berlin, a place that I have come to consider a second home. Throughout that time, Germany has changed enormously, both demographically and attitudinally. In relation to diversity in general and in its relationship to Jews.