Refine
Year of publication
- 2021 (2) (remove)
Document Type
- Master's Thesis (2) (remove)
Institute
- Fakultät Nachhaltigkeit (2) (remove)
Im Kontext der Problematik von Fehlinformationen in der populärwissenschaftlichen Literatur widmet sich diese Arbeit in einer Fallstudie drei häufig verkauften Büchern Peter Wohllebens. Untersucht wird, wie nah diese Werke sich am aktuellen Stand der Forschung orientieren und wie gut die getätigten Aussagen nachvollziehbar sind. Für die Untersuchung wurde der Inhalt der Bücher codiert und die resultierenden 8899 Codiereinheiten quantitativ und qualitativ-vergleichend analysiert. Ergänzt wurde dies durch die qualitativ-vergleichende Analyse von drei Schwerpunktthemen. Aus den Ergebnissen wird geschlussfolgert, dass Wohllebens Nähe zum wissenschaftlichen Diskurs unter Einschränkungen ausreichend und die Nachvollziehbarkeit seiner Aussagen mangelhaft ist. Basierend auf diesen Erkenntnissen werden mögliche Maßnahmen und Handlungsfelder für eine Erhöhung der wissenschaftlichen Qualität populärwissenschaftlicher Werke diskutiert. Es werden weitere potentielle Forschungsmöglichkeiten für ein besseres Verständnis der Situation in den Populärwissenschaften identifiziert und vorgeschlagen.
Misophonia in the workplace
(2021)
This paper uses the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals’ inclusion of human well-being and disability rights as a base to examine the work experiences of individuals with the syndrome misophonia who have been employed in white-collar office jobs in the Global North, and how these experiences fit into the current discourse on making offices more inclusive and sustainable. It reports on common workplace triggers, coping mechanisms, and the condition’s perceived effects on misophonics, as well as the perceived barriers and carriers to making workplaces more accommodating to those with the condition. A mixed-methods approach was used to address these points. First, a survey was distributed virtually and 203 responses from misophonics who work(ed) in white-collar office jobs in the study region were collected. Next, ten of these survey takers participated in semi-structured, one-on-one interviews, which were then analyzed using qualitative text analysis. The results showed that many misophonics frequently encounter intense triggers (such as mouth sounds) at the office and that self-perceived levels of productivity, well-being, and workplace sociability can be adversely affected. Though opinions on bans of certain behaviors and items and on certain terminology were diverse, there was consensus on desiring more flexible policies, understanding from others, and quiet or private working spaces, including working from home. Lack of misophonia awareness within the general populace, human resources (HR), upper management, and to some degree, the medical community was identified as a persistent barrier to misophonic employees disclosing or asking for reasonable accommodations even when they felt their misophonia was severe, negatively affected them, and there were provisions that could support them. These experiences were similar to those of other invisible conditions and pointed to the need for workplaces striving to be more sustainable and inclusive to adapt their policies and office design decisions.