Abstract Executive coach Riegel, and entrepreneur Macaulay discuss the nuances of failure within leadership, and how it can potentially lead to ultimate success and professional/personal self‐development. They contend that “When a leader is able to build a culture that rewards risk‐taking—intelligent risk‐taking—then setbacks are not invitations to play the blame game. Rather, they are opportunities for learning and growth.” They identify “five distinct failure patterns” for leaders to be aware of; in their words: 1) concrete failure, 2) circumstantial failure, 3) perceived failure, 4) identity failure, and 5) paralysis failure. They further identify three strategic reframes that can be used by leaders in any sector; in their words: From Verdict to Information; From Crisis to Calibration; and From Shame to Strategy. They discuss what they call the Ground‐Gather‐Go! “three‐step framework for recovering from setbacks and returning stronger.” In their words, the three steps are: Ground: Creating Space for Strategic Thinking; Gather: Systematic Intelligence Collection; and Go: Strategic Action with Built‐in Learning. “Based on our combined experience working with thousands of leaders across sectors,” they conclude, “the most successful leaders aren't those who avoid failure; they're those who have mastered the art of learning from their failures.”

LLM-Based Viewpoint Mining in the “Blame Game”: How U.S. Media Frame China’s Debt Debate

This article examines the representation of perpetrator trauma and implicated subjects in Ahmed Yerima’s Heart of Stone and Pari. The article argues that blame game and condemning the perpetrators of Boko Haram terrorism without examining the totality of identities and relationships that perpetuate injustice is a weak and ineffective counterterrorism strategy. Antithetical to the extant studies on both plays which largely focus on a portrayal of the religious identity and the monstrous persona of the perpetrators – Musa and Ibrahim, this paper adopts Saira Mohamed’s thesis on perpetrator trauma and Michael Rothberg’s theory of implication to demonstrate that analysing perpetrators as human beings with their weak moments brings more understanding of the conflict and that taking collective responsibility to curb terrorism and effect justice involves dissecting the identity and relationships of the implicated subjects with the perpetrators and the victims. Specifically, the study, on the one hand, reveals traumatic memory, paroxysm of anger, feeling of guilt and regret, reenactment and rationalisation as symptoms of trauma exhibited by Musa and Ibrahim after perpetrating terrorist activities. On the other hand, the study identifies some victims and relatives of the perpetrators (collectively termed ‘cultural/societal agents’) who are implicated in the perpetuation of terrorism in northeastern Nigeria. It is concluded that the overlap of complicity and implication in the discourse of (Boko Haram) terrorism needs more studied probing in order to excite collective responsibility that will eventually avert rushed condemnation of perpetrators and perpetuation of injustice through the actions of implicated subjects.

26 Not a blame game: A 5year review of iatrogenic mandible fractures during third molar removal by general dental practioners

Accountability-based accounting in the blame game for post-disaster aid

Abstract In three presidential election cycles from 2016 to 2024, the Democratic Party nominated two women, Hillary Clinton and Kamala Harris, and one man, Joe Biden. Each ran against the Republican Party’s repeat nominee, Donald Trump, with Clinton and Harris losing and Biden winning. This paper examines the role that sexism plays when women lose elections, focusing on the narratives used to explain Democrats’ (and Harris’s) loss in 2024. Using original survey data, we find that men and women attribute blame across the candidates differently from one another. Regardless of party identification, women voters are significantly less likely than men to blame Harris most for Democrats’ loss. Indeed, women who identify as Democrats and Independents blame Harris the least for Democrats’ loss. We also find evidence that the blame gap between men and women in their views of Kamala Harris is significantly mediated by hostile, though not benevolent sexism. The dual finding of a gender gap in blame attribution and the persistence of hostile sexist attitudes among some voters has important implications for the Democratic Party as it processes their loss in 2024 and looks ahead in nominating candidates to run in future elections.

Abstract How do elections affect credit-claiming and blame-shifting patterns in times of crisis? To answer this so far unanswered yet relevant question for crisis management, this study analyses government crisis communication in Germany’s consensus democracy, where federal elections took place in the second year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Empirically, this study examines media conferences from January 2021 to December 2021, which reveal that the Minister of Health not only shifted responsibility and blame but also claimed credit – particularly before the election. He also opted for implicit rather than explicit forms of blame shifting within the political system and shifted responsibility to citizens. The strategies of citizen blaming and credit claiming were most frequent during the ‘federal emergency brake’ when responsibility was more centralised than in other moments of the pandemic. This research advances blame avoidance theory by combining situational factors (crisis and electoral pressure) and institutional moderators (form of government and governance structures) to explain credit-claiming and blame-shifting patterns. Overall, the findings of this study indicate that institutional factors can moderate blame games in particularly challenging situations when it is essential for political systems to address societal and underlying political problems instead of getting caught up in blame games.

Problem denial is the blame-avoider’s strategy of choice. If alleged harms can be rebutted or reframed, the blame game is forestalled before it begins. In current theory, problem denial is thought to be limited by plausibility and reputation. If denials stretch credulity, or if the denier has a track record of denial, the strategy will be short-lived. Conversely, this article investigates whether problem denial is enabled by seniority within the machinery of government. By observing how different tiers of UK central government respond to 235 inquiries by the Public Accounts Committee, it shows that the core executive does indeed rebut more criticism than ordinary line ministries, whereas ministries and administrative agencies show no difference. Qualitative analysis of committee transcripts indicates that this is explained by lower relational distance between committee and finance ministry, which is regarded as an ally in promoting value-for-money and so granted more licence to deny.

Large-scale religious events generate considerable amounts of solid waste calling for dedicated research to quantify wastage, explore its drivers, understand stakeholder perceptions and design effective management strategies. Responding to this call, this study investigated the generation of food and plastic waste during the 2023 Arba'een pilgrimage in Karbala, Iraq, one of the world's largest annual religious festivals. A mixed-methods research design was employed combining quantitative waste audits, conducted over 20 days at selected mawkibs (volunteer-run foodservice stations) and municipal waste disposal points, with qualitative semi-structured interviews (n = 60) involving mawkib owners, pilgrims, religious leaders and municipal authorities. Audits revealed substantial waste: 7900 tonnes of food and 4000 tonnes of plastic. Per pilgrim, 0.36 kg of food and 0.18 kg of plastic were generated, accounting for 0.72% and 0.58% of Iraq's total annual hospitality food waste and all-sectors-total plastic waste, respectively. Interviews explored such thematic areas as waste drivers, behavioural practices and responsibility attribution. Findings highlighted a 'blame game' dynamic between mawkibs and pilgrims regarding wastage. Religious leaders cited a moral tension, noting how observed excess in consumption contrasted sharply with Islamic values of modesty and resource conservation, while authorities stressed logistical constraints. This study provides novel empirical data, highlighting the complex interplay between traditional Islamic hospitality and sustainability. It outlines scope for waste reduction interventions, such as portion control at mawkibs and promoting alternative serving materials, such as bio-plastics, for future large-scale religious events.

This paper examines the imposition of new institutional evaluation and accreditation practices in Greek Higher Education (HE) in the last twenty years (from 2005 onwards). This is accomplished through a Discourse-Historical Analysis (DHA) of the Parliamentary Proceedings for key legislation. The analysis reveals the construction of a “blame game” against the academic institutions, where various political actors openly have called for radical institutional restructuring, which promotes the marketization of public HE.

Building on research on the critical role of laypeople in medicalization and the multi-dimensional character of this process, this study explores the effects and meanings of the ADHD category for mothers and teachers of diagnosed children. Based on interviews with 27 schoolteachers from two different schools and 42 mothers of children diagnosed with ADHD, we show that despite the growing acceptance of ADHD as a medical diagnosis, it exhibits only minor narrative, institutional, and moral effects in school and family arenas. The diagnostic label attributed to children does not resolve blame games and uncertainty about the source of children's difficulties and does not provide many pragmatic benefits for either mothers or teachers. We argue that these limited narrative, moral and institutional effects are shaped by the moral positionings available to mothers and teachers, the institutional status of ADHD as a category of disability, and educational policy. We distinguish medicalization's institutional and interpersonal dimensions and explore their complex interrelations. Our analysis resonates with recent moves in medical sociology toward more pragmatic and practice-based analyses of the effects of medical categories, particularly when enacted outside traditional healthcare settings.

Introduction: Being an intense blamer is bad for one's relationships and for one's mental health. Although existing literature provides strong support for these harmful impacts of blame, the relevant studies examine a narrow set of relationship types and a narrow type of blame. Our goal in this article is to extend the blame literature by examining the relational and mental health harms of blame in novel relationship settings (peer relations among emerging adults) and with respect to novel blame-eliciting events (everyday transgressions). Method: In Study 1, we collected survey responses from sorority sisters at the beginning of a semester (T1) and again several weeks later (T2). Results: We found that sisters who were intense blamers of peers at T1 were significantly less well-liked and less mentally healthy at T2 than would be expected based on their T1 likability and mental health. These detrimental impacts of blame were particularly strong among sisters whose blame did not co-occur with any compassion for peer transgressors. Method: In Study 2, we took an experimental approach. College roommates attended a Wise Blame Workshop (or not). Results: We found that the workshop improved several different blame-related beliefs and practices and that these improvements mediated beneficial impacts of the workshop on relationship quality and mental health. Discussion: Our findings underscore the importance of what we call “wise blame,” and they widen the scope within which one should expect to find detrimental impacts of blame on relationships and on mental health. Finally, our results suggest that blame-related interventions might be helpful for ameliorating the epidemics of social disconnection and mental illness that are plaguing teens and emerging adults.

The opioid crisis in the United States (U.S.) has spurred widespread public discourse over the last two decades, especially in the news media. The increased usage of Facebook as a medium to share and discuss news has helped to shape the public perception of opioid usage. We examine a substantial, national sample of 513,533 unique posts from 94 of the largest English language newspapers in the U.S. We examine the differences in opioid misuse (1,411) posts and non-opioid drug (3,626) posts, along with the comments made on these posts (48,680). Using supervised learning methods, we classify posts and comments based on categories relevant to understanding perceptions and attitudes regarding the opioid epidemic (e.g., family/friend, blame, illness). We then create a model to help better understand the factors that lead to posts in each category. We make several discoveries, including that the percentage of vote share for Donald Trump in the 2016 Presidential election in a paper's home county, and a higher percentage of black and Hispanic residents was associated with fewer blame related opioid posts. We suggest that given the historical stigma attached to minority groups in previous drug epidemics, there may be a reluctance on the part of those groups to cast blame in the opiate epidemic.

This study examines the blame game among three key agents—parents, teachers, and students—with academic and disciplinary issues in the Nepalese context. In Nepal, no substantial studies have been conducted on this issue. The researcher adopted qualitative and narrative inquiry to examine and analyze participants lived experiences. The participants were five teachers, three students, and three parents. The findings suggest that parents’ consistent involvement in their children’s education yields positive outcomes. However, teachers are sometimes not supported by administrators and teachers also need motivation in the same way students aspire to. It is recommended that parents sacrifice certain things for their child’s education. Teachers must seek better ways to keep students engaged in productive activities, and schools must take the initiative to build a good rapport with parents and the community for the well-being of all their members. Students, parents, teachers, and school administrators should work in collaboration to achieve their common goals.

Corruption in criminal justice systems adversely affects governance, justice delivery, and sociopolitical and economic growth. Corruption leads to disregard for due process, undermines trust and confidence in institutions, impacts law-abiding behavior, violates citizen's rights and liberties, and aggravates inequalities and suffering of poor and vulnerable people. As a result, people who engage in corruption usually look for conditions to blame for the occurrence of corruption. Such a cause-and-effect approach fails to recognize the prospect of perceived causes being used as techniques to deny, neutralize, or justify the occurrence or persistence of corruption and its impact. Using interview data from 65 justice and anti-corruption officials, this study explores perceived causes of corruption in Ghana's criminal justice system from the perspectives of neutralization and justification. The results show that criminal justice officials identified various factors as contributing to corruption, including economic conditions, commitment to kinship and other networks, greed and materialistic orientation, suspicion between criminal justice officials, and blame game. It is argued that factors perceived by criminal justice officials as causes of corruption could be techniques employed to neutralize, justify, and deny corruption and its impact on people. The implication of the results for research, policy, and practice is discussed.

It is widely believed that Britain is grappling with a housing emergency. This may be the culmination of policies and practices deeply rooted in the past, but its extent and accelerating impact on the lives of families and, especially, children, make headlines every day. No wonder scholars and activists, like the public at large, take it so personally. This article, prefaced by a short introduction, comprises two reflections from a discussion in the British Academy’s popular Summer Showcase series, which also benefitted from a lively presentation by Kieren Yates around her book All the Houses I’ve Ever Lived In (2023, Simon and Shuster). One author tackles the injustices of a ‘blame game’ around limited housing supply, the other offers a moving testimony to the carelessness built into housing environments by the long running under-provision of accessible homes. This article accompanies another in this issue, ‘Six provocations on the origins and impacts of the UK housing emergency’, by Ben Ansell, Martin Daunton, Emily Grundy, John Muellbauer, Michael Murphy, Avner Offer, and Susan J. Smith.

This study aims at exploring the discursive ideological war on terror between India and Pakistan in the print media of both the countries. In doing so, it primarily focuses on the lexical choices used by the Pakistani and Indian print media for the representation of the Tehrik-e-Labbaik protest in the context of their conflicting ideologies on war on terror. Data was collected from the Indian newspaper Times of India and the Pakistani newspaper The News International and analyzed through the corpus software Antconc. This study employed, as a theoretical Lense, van Dijk’s theory of “US’ vs “THEM and his ideological square model in the analysis of data. The analysis was delimited to keywords and collocations only. The results of the study revealed that The Times of India represented the protest by Tehrik-e-Labbaik using negative lexical choices in order to implicate Pakistan in terrorist and extremist activities in the region. In contrast, The News International used neutral and positive lexical choices for the same protest so as to present Pakistan in a positive light and highlight its efforts for eradicating terrorism in the region. Thus, the print media of both the countries propagate the respective ideologies of their countries and represent the positive image of the ‘self’ and the negative image of the ‘other’ in the context of war on terror in the region.

Takeaway Mother's own breast milk provides the most protection from necrotizing enterocolitis. Preterm formula does not provide protection against necrotizing enterocolitis, but is the standard if breast milk cannot be used.

ABSTRACTDisasters exacerbate political tensions, making politicians more vulnerable to criticisms from both internal and external actors. This vulnerability fuels political actors' desire to undermine their rivals' popularity through blame games. While blame games are frequent and intense in Turkish politics, how they are linguistically constructed has received less scholarly attention. This study aimed to understand how Turkish governmental and oppositional actors utilize blame‐game strategies in the context of weather‐related disasters. Through a content analysis of politicians' statements across 41 weather‐related events, the study establishes a framework for analyzing blame games in non‐Western democracies and identifies a Turkish style of weather‐related disaster blame game, which has salient, yet slightly distant, characteristics. The study concludes that all political actors engage in a blame game as part of political competition. However, their communication strategies, including both blame‐making and blame‐avoidance, vary in frequency and linguistic style depending on their position. Governmental actors deflect blame by highlighting past actions and promising aid, while the opposition counters by offering vague policy suggestions. Both sides make blames, but the government criticizes past policies and the opposition's current actions, while the opposition focuses on the government's current policies and the actors' potentially unethical conduct.

Conflicting narratives about who is responsible for a cyberattack are often thought to create uncertainty about the aggressor’s identity, which in turn could lead to greater restraint in state responses. Although this argument seems compelling, it has not been thoroughly tested. Building on studies of foreign cues and public opinion, this paper presents results from three survey experiments that investigate whether competing narratives about the identity of a cyber aggressor affect Americans’ confidence in public attribution claims and support for retribution policies. The results show that endorsements from allies significantly boost the public’s confidence in attribution, as well as increase support for unilateral and multilateral retaliation measures. In particular, messages from allies have the strongest impact on Democrats, Independents, and doves. In contrast, disavowals from adversaries generally reduce respondents’ confidence in official accusations and diminish their willingness to back retaliation. Nonetheless, denial effects do not consistently reach conventional statistical significance levels across all experiments. These findings highlight the potential role that both allies and adversaries can play in shaping public opinion and cybersecurity policy through contested public attributions.