A social-psychological examination of academic precarity as an organizational practice and subjective experience.

Research and teaching conditions have, particularly for those who are junior or from disadvantaged backgrounds, deteriorated considerably over the years in the higher education sector. Unequal opportunities in access and advancement in careers have led to increasing levels of precarity in the higher education sector. Although the concept of precarity has been grasped in many other disciplines, the social-psychological understanding of this concept remains unexplored. In this paper, we aim to develop a social-psychological understanding of precarity to examine how identity dynamics and intergroup relations, as well as associated organizational controls, reinforce inequality regimes and power structures that create precarious conditions in academia. In doing so, we use social identity theory and system justification theory under an inequality regime framework. We argue that even though change towards equality and equity in academia should be possible, it is difficult to achieve this because of entrenched identity interests by power holders and the perceived legitimacy of the existing system. Therefore, academic precarity should be recognized both as a subjective experience and as an organizational practice to make inequalities more visible and decrease the perceptions of legitimacy-and to eventually achieve a fundamental positive transformation in academia.

Ethical concerns arising from recruiting workers from Amazon's Mechanical Turk as research participants: Commentary on Burnette et al. (2021).

In this commentary, we respond to Burnette et al.'s (2021) paper, which gives significant practical recommendations to improve data quality and validity while gathering data via Amazon's Mechanical Turk (MTurk). We argue that it is also important to acknowledge and review the specific ethical issues that might arise when recruiting MTurk workers as participants. We particularly raise three main ethical concerns that need to be addressed when recruiting research participants from participant recruitment platforms: participants' economic vulnerability, participants' sensitivity, and power dynamics between participants and researchers. We elaborate on these issues by discussing the ways in which they may appear and be responded to. We conclude that considering the ethical aspects of data collection and the potential impacts of data collection on those involved would complement Burnette et al.'s recommendations. Consequently, data collection processes should be transparent as well, in addition to data screening processes.

Measuring global bystander intervention and exploring its antecedents for helping refugees.

Although the bystander intervention model provides a useful account of how people help others, no previous study has applied it to a global emergency. This research aims to develop a scale for measuring global bystander intervention and investigate its potential antecedents in the Syrian refugee emergency. In Study 1 (N = 80) and Study 2 (N = 205), a 12-item scale was established through a substantive-validity assessment and a confirmatory factor analysis, respectively. Study 3 (N = 601) explored the potential antecedents of the global bystander intervention, employing British and German samples. Results show that the global bystander intervention model worked for both samples, but there were significant between-group differences in terms of the extent to which they notice the emergency, know how to help, show political support, and donate money. Overall, the visibility of the global emergency aftermaths within the context has been deduced as a meaningful driver for between-group differences. This research provides the first empirical evidence on global bystander intervention and it offers timely suggestions to promote support for refugees or other victims of global disasters, especially among those who are distant to the disaster zone.