Search

Copyright of Annals of Gastroenterology is the property of Hellenic Society of Gastroenterology and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Taiwan Economic Forecast & Policy is the property of Institute of Economics, Academia Sinica, Taiwan Economic Forecast & Policy and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Taiwan Economic Forecast & Policy is the property of Institute of Economics, Academia Sinica, Taiwan Economic Forecast & Policy and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Taiwan Law Review is the property of Angle Publishing Co., Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This paper explores social stratification and social inequality in Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan by comprehensively analyzing the effects of occupation on one's class status. In this paper, the author examines the effects that a person's occupational conditions, such as occupation (interpreted narrowly), employment status, type of employment contract (standard or non-standard), and company size, have on his/her individual income and class consciousness, and how these effects vary within East Asian societies on the basis of each society's unique labor market structure and local institutions. The analysis of the 2005 Social Stratification and Social Mobility (SSM) survey data led to the following findings. On the whole, the effects of occupational conditions on income and class consciousness are similar within all these societies. However, the relative impacts of these conditions differ considerably. While occupation (narrowly interpreted) has predominant effects in Taiwan, the effects of company size and type of employment contract are also considerable in Japan, and partly so in Korea. It is also notable that in the case of Japanese males, company size and type of employment contract have significant effects on class consciousness, even after the effects of individual income are controlled. These effects can be attributed to some factors that are unique to the Japanese management system, such as career-long employment and the wage seniority system that are usually offered to the standard male employees of large companies. From these findings, we can conclude that we should focus on local institutional factors as well as global factors for a better understanding of present-day social stratification and social inequality in East Asian societies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper compares media relations in Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and the United States. There are several significant findings. First, the media-public relations practitioner relationship is more informal and closer in Asia than it is in the U.S. Second, media ethics, such as gift giving and informal gatherings, are different in these Asian cultures and in the U.S. Finally, the U.S. journalists and public relations practitioners have more positive attitudes toward on-line types of source-reporter relations than Asian journalists and practitioners do. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed based on the findings of this comparative analysis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]