hak dan kewajiban warga negara

NAMA  : ANISA RIZKY AMALIA
KELAS : 2EA06
NPM     : 10211925 


PENGERTIAN HAK

Hak adalah segala sesuatu yang harus di dapatkan oleh setiap orang yang telah ada sejak lahir bahkan sebelum lahir.

Terkadang kita sering mendengar kata hak dan kewajiban dalam kehidupan sehari-hari. hak seorang manusia merupakan fitrah yang ada sejak mereka lahir.Ketika lahir, manusia secara hakiki telah mempunyai hak dan kewajiban. Tiap manusia mempunyai hak dan kewajiban yang berbeda, tergantung pada misalnya, jabatan atau kedudukan dalam masyarakat. Sebelum membahas lebih lanjut mengenai hak dan kewajiban, penulis ingin memaparkan pengertian hak dan kewajiban. K. Bertens dalam bukunya yang berjudul Etika memaparkan bahwa dalam pemikiran Romawi Kuno, kata ius-iurus (Latin: hak) hanya menunjukkan hukum dalam arti objektif. Artinya adalah hak dilihat sebagai keseluruhan undang-undang, aturan-aturan dan lembaga-lembaga yang mengatur kehidupan masyarakat demi kepentingan umum (hukum dalam arti Law, bukan right). Pada akhir Abad Pertengahan ius dalam arti subjektif, bukan benda yang dimiliki seseorang, yaitu kesanggupan seseorang untuk sesuka hati menguasai sesuatu atau melakukan sesuatu(right, bukan law). Akhirnya hak pada saat itu merupakan hak yang subjektif merupakan pantulan dari hukum dalam arti objektif. Hak dan kewajiban mempunyai hubungan yang sangat. Kewajiban dibagi atas dua macam, yaitu kewajiban sempurna yang selalu berkaitan dengan hak orang lain dan kewajiban tidak sempurna yang tidak terkait dengan hak orang lain. Kewajiban sempurna mempunyai dasar keadilan, sedangkan kewajiban tidak sempurna berdasarkan moral.hak merupakan sesuatu yang urgen dalam kehidupan ini. setiap orang berhak mendapatkan hak setelah memenuhi kewajiban.

 Warga Negara Mempunyai hak-hak yang patut diberikan dan dilindungi oleh Negara, antara lain berdasarkan UUD 1945 :

-          Pasal 27 (2)     : setiap warga negara berhak atas pekerjaan dan penghidupan yang layak bagi kemanusiaan.

-          Pasal 29 (2)     : setiap Warga negara memiliki kemerdekaan untuk memeluk agamanya.

-          Pasal 31 (1)     : setiap warga Negara berhak mendapatkan pengajaran.

PENGERTIAN KEWAJIBAN

Kewajiban adalah  sesuatu yang harus dilakukan dengan penuh rasa tanggung jawab. Dari kewajiban inilah kita bisa mendapatkan hak kita karena hak dan kewajiban memiliki hubungan timbal balik

 

Kewajiban Warga Negara Indonesia:
 

1. Setiap warga negara wajib ikut serta dalam upaya pembelaan negara (pasal 27 ayat 3). 
2. Setiap orang wajib menghormati hak asasi manusia orang lain dalam tertib kehidupan bermasyarakat, berbangsa dan bernegara. (pasal 28J ayat 1). 
3. Dalam menjalankan hak dan kebebasannya, setiap orang wajib tunduk kepada pembatasan yang ditetapkan dengan undang-undang dengan maksud semata-mata untuk menjamin pengakuan serta penghormatan atas hak dan kebebasan orang lain dan untuk memenuhi tuntutan yang adil sesuai dengan pertimbangan moral, nila-nilai agama, keamanan dan ketertiban umum dalam suatu masyarakat demokratis. (pasal 28J ayat 2).
4. Tiap-tiap warga Negara berhak dan wajib ikut serta dalam usaha pertahanan dan keamanan negara (pasal 30 ayat 1).
5. Setiap warga negara wajib mengikuti pendidikan dasar dan pemerintah wajib membiayainya (pasal 31 ayat 2).
6. Menjunjung tinggi nilai-nilai kemanusiaan dan keadilan (Pembukaan UUD 1945, alinea I).
7. Menghargai nilai-nilai persatuan, kemerdekaan dan kedaulatan bangsa (Pembukaan UUD 1945, alinea II).
8. Menjunjung tinggi dan setia kepada konstitusi Negara dan dasar Negara (Pembukaan UUD 1945, alinea IV).
9. Setia membayar pajak untuk negara (Pasal 23 ayat 2).

Contoh pengamalan kewajiban Warga Negara Indonesia dalam kehidupan sehari-hari yaitu:

1. Setiap warga negara memiliki kewajiban untuk berperan serta dalam membela, mempertahankan kedaulatan negara Indonesia dari serangan musuh. 
2. Membayar pajak dan retribusi yang telah ditetapkan oleh pemerintah pusat dan pemerintah daerah (pemda).
3. Mentaati peraturan lalu lintas, menjauhi praktik korupsi serta nepotisme dalam bekerja.
4. Turut serta dalam pembangunan untuk membangun bangsa agar bangsa kita bisa berkembang dan maju ke arah yang lebih baik.
5. Ikut serta dalam mengamankan lingkungan sekitar (seperti siskamling).
6. Ikut serta membantu korban bencana di dalam negeri.

Hubungan Antara Hak dan Kewajiban Warga Negara
Hak dan kewajiban ini adalah sesuatu yang tidak dapat dipisahkan, karena bagaimanapun dari kewajiban itulah mucul hak-hak dan sebaliknya. Akan tetapi sering terjadi pertentangan karena hak dan kewajiban tidak seimbang.
Sudah sangat jelas bahwa setiap warga negara memiliki hak dan kewajiban untuk mendapatkan penghidupan yang layak, akan tetapi pada kenyataannya banyak warga negara yang belum merasakan kesejahteraan dalam menjalani kehidupannya. 

Hal ini disebabkan oleh banyak terjadi ketidakseimbangan antara hak dan kewajiban. Jika keseimbangan itu tidak ada maka akan terjadi kesenjangan sosial yang berkepanjangan.

Untuk mencapai keseimbangan antara hak dan kewajiban, yaitu dengan cara mengetahui posisi diri kita sendiri. Sebagai seorang warga negara kita harus tahu hak dan kewajiban kita. Laksanakan apa yang menjadi kewajiban kita serta perjuangkan apa yang menjadi hak kita. Seorang pejabat atau pemerintah pun harus tahu akan hak dan kewajibannya. Seperti yang sudah tercantum dalam hukum dan aturan-aturan yang berlaku. Jika hak dan kewajiban seimbang dan terpenuhi, maka kehidupan masyarakat akan aman sejahtera.

Demokrasi

NAMA  : ANISA RIZKY AMALIA
KELAS : 2EA06
NPM     : 10211925


DEMOKRASI

Demokrasi adalah bentuk pemerintahan yang semua warga negaranya memiliki hak setara dalam pengambilan keputusan yang dapat mengubah hidup mereka. Demokrasi mengizinkan warga negara berpartisipasi baik secara langsung atau melalui perwakilan dalam perumusan, pengembangan, dan pembuatan hukum. Demokrasi mencakup kondisi sosial, ekonomi, dan budaya yang memungkinkan adanya praktik kebebasan politik secara bebas dan setara.

Penerapan Budaya Demokrasi Dalam Kehidupan Sehari-hari :

1. Di Lingkungan Keluarga
Penerapan Budaya demokrasi di lingkungan keluarga dapat diwujudkan dalam bentuk sebagai berikut:
a) ¬ Kesediaan untuk menerima kehadiran sanak saudara;
b) ¬ Menghargai pendapat anggota keluarga lainya;
c) ¬ Senantiasa musyawarah untuk pembagian kerja;
d) ¬ Terbuka terhadap suatu masalah yang dihadapi bersama.

2. Di Lingkungan Masyarakat
Penerapan Budaya demokrasi di lingkungan masyarakat dapat diwujudkan dalam bentuk sebagai berikut:
a) ¬ Bersedia mengakui kesalahan yang telah dibuatnya;
b) ¬ Kesediaan hidup bersama dengan warga masyarakat tanpa diskriminasi;
c) ¬ Menghormati pendapat orang lain yang berbeda dengannya;
d) ¬ Menyelesaikan masalah dengan mengutamakan kompromi;
e) ¬ Tidak terasa benar atau menang sendiri dalam berbicara dengan warga lain.

3. Di Lingkungan Sekolah
Penerapan Budaya demokrasi di lingkungan sekolah dapat diwujudkan dalam bentuk sebagai berikut:
a) ¬ Bersedia bergaul dengan teman sekolah tanpa membeda-bedakan;
b) ¬ Menerima teman-teman yang berbeda latar belakang budaya, ras,agama
c) ¬ Menghargai pendapat teman meskipun pendapat itu berbeda dengan kita;
d) ¬ Mengutamakan musyawarah, dalam menyelesaikan masalah

4. Di Lingkungan Kehidupan Bernegara
Penerapan Budaya demokrasi di lingkungan kehidupan bernegara dapat diwujudkan dalam bentuk sebagai berikut:
a) ¬ Besedia menerima kesalahan atau kekalahan secara dewasa dan ikhlas;
b) ¬ Kesediaan para pemimpin untuk senantiasa mendengar dan menghargai
c) ¬ Memiliki kejujuran dan integritas;
d) ¬ Memiliki rasa malu dan bertanggung jawab kepada publik;
e) ¬ Menghargai hak-hak kaum minoritas;
f) ¬ Menghargai perbedaan yang ada pada rakyat;
g) ¬ Mengutamakan musyawarah untuk kesepakatan berrsama untuk menyelesaikan

SUMBER:
 http://id.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demokrasi

Sistem Pemerintahan & Perkembangan Pendidikan

NAMA  : ANISA RIZKY AMALIA
KELAS : 2EA06
NPM     : 10211925

SISTEM PEMERINTAHAN

Sistem pemerintahan adalah sistem yang dimiliki suatu negara dalam mengatur pemerintahannya.
Sesuai dengan kondisi negara masing-masing, sistem ini dibedakan menjadi:

1. Presidensial
2. Parlementer
3. Semipresidensial
4. Komunis
5. Demokrasi liberal
6. liberal

Sistem pemerintahan mempunyai sistem dan tujuan untuk menjaga suatu kestabilan negara itu. Namun di beberapa negara sering terjadi tindakan separatisme karena sistem pemerintahan yang dianggap memberatkan rakyat ataupun merugikan rakyat. Sistem pemerintahan mempunyai fondasi yang kuat dimana tidak bisa diubah dan menjadi statis. Jika suatu pemerintahan mempunya sistem pemerintahan yang statis, absolut maka hal itu akan berlangsung selama-lamanya hingga adanya desakan kaum minoritas untuk memprotes hal tersebut.
Secara luas berarti sistem pemerintahan itu menjaga kestabilan masyarakat, menjaga tingkah laku kaum mayoritas maupun minoritas, menjaga fondasi pemerintahan, menjaga kekuatan politik, pertahanan, ekonomi, keamanan sehingga menjadi sistem pemerintahan yang kontinu dan demokrasi dimana seharusnya masyarakat bisa ikut turut andil dalam pembangunan sistem pemerintahan tersebut.Hingga saat ini hanya sedikit negara yang bisa mempraktikkan sistem pemerintahan itu secara menyeluruh.
Secara sempit,Sistem pemerintahan hanya sebagai sarana kelompok untuk menjalankan roda pemerintahan guna menjaga kestabilan negara dalam waktu relatif lama dan mencegah adanya perilaku reaksioner maupun radikal dari rakyatnya itu sendiri.


SISTEM PENDIDIKAN

Sistem pendidikan nasional adalah keseluruhan komponen pendidikan yang saling terkait secara terpadu untuk mencapai tujuan pendidikan nasional.

UUSPN dari No. 2 tahun 1989 diganti UU No. 20 tahun 2003, dilakukan dalam rangka memperbarui visi, misi dan strategi pendidikan nasional. Pembaruan sistem pendidikan nasional mencakup penghapusan diskriminasi antara pendidikan formal dan pendidikan non-formal.

Visi pendidikan nasional adalah memberdayakan semua warga negara Indonesia, sehingga dapat berkembang menjadi manusia berkualitas yang mampu bersaing dan sekaligus bersanding dalam menjawab tantangan zaman.

Misi pendidikan nasional adalah:

-   Mengupayakan perluasan dan pemerataan kesempatan memperoleh pendidikan yang bermutu bagi seluruh rakyat Indonesia.

-   Membantu dan memfasilitasi pengembangan potensi anak bangsa secara utuh sejak usia dini sampai akhir hayat dalam rangka mewujudkan masyarakat belajar.

-   Meningkatkan kesiapan masukan dan kualitas proses pendidikan untuk mengoptimalkan pembentukan kepribadian yang bermoral.

-   Meningkatkan keprofesionalan dan akuntabilitas lembaga pendidikan sebagai pusat pembudayaan, ilmu pengetahuan, keterampilan, pengalaman, sikap, dan nilai berdasarkan standar nasional dan global.

-   Memberdayakan peran serta masyarakat dalam menyelenggarakan pendidikan berdasarkan prinsip otonomi dalam konteks NKRI.

Berdasarkan visi dan misi pendidikan nasional tersebut, maka fungsi pendidikan nasional adalah mengembangkan kemampuan dan membentuk watak serta peradaban bangsa yang bermartabat dalam rangka mencerdaskan kehidupan bangsa. Tujuan pendidikan nasional adalah untuk mengembangkan potensi-potensi peserta didik yang menjadi manusia beriman dan bertaqwa kepada Tuhan Yang Maha Esa, berakhlak mulia, sehat, berilmu, cakap, kreatif, mandiri dan menjadi warga negara yang demokratis serta bertanggungjawab.

Strategi pendidikan nasional adalah:

- Pelaksanaan pendidikan agama serta akhlak mulia.

- Pengembangan dan pelaksanaan kurkulum berbasis kompetensi.

- Proses pembelajaran yang mendidik dan dialogis.

- Evaluasi, akreditasi dan sertifikasi pendidikan yang memberdayakan.

- Peningkatan keprofesionalan pendidik dan tenaga kependidikan.

- Penyediaan sarana belajar yang mendidik.

- Pembiayaan pendidikan yang sesuai dengan prinsip pemerataan dan berkeadilan.

- Penyelenggaraan pendidikan yang terbuka dan merata.

- Pelaksanaan wajib belajar.

- Pelaksanaan otonomi manajemen pendidikan.

- Pemberdayaan peran masyarakat.

- Pusat pembudayaan dan pembangunan masyarakat.

- Pelaksanaan pengawasan dalam sistem pendidikan nasional.

Pendidikan pada hakekatnya adalah usaha sadar dan terencana untuk mewujudkan suasana belajar dan proses pembelajaran agar peserta didik secara aktif mengembangkan potensi dirinya untuk memiliki kekuatan spiritual keagamaan, pengendalian diri, kepribadian, kecerdasan, ahklak mulia, serta keterampilan yang diperlukan dirinya masyarakat, bangsa dan negara.

Pendidikan nasional adalah pendidikan yang berdasarkan Pancasila dan UUD 1945 yang berakar pada nilai-nilai agama, kebudayaan nasional Indonesia, dan tanggap terhadap perubahan zaman. Fungsi dan tujuan pendidikan nasional tercantum dalam UU No. 20 tahun 2003 bab II pasal 3.

MENURUT SAYA: 

Kondisi yang terjadi di Indonesia saat ini, pendidikan hanya mementingkan kuantitas daripada kualitas. Hal ini terlihat dari motivasi siswa untuk lulus lebih berkiblat pada lulus dengan nilai baik, mendapatkan ijazah yang memudahkan untuk mencari pekerjaan. Hal ini menyebabkan gelar menjadi suatu tolak ukur ‘kecerdasan’. Esensi pendidikan pun bergeser. Tujuan untuk mendapatkan ‘ilmu’ dikesampingkan, metode belajar hanya terpaku oleh bahan-bahan hapalan yang memaksa siswa untuk merapalkannya bagai mantra. Efek samping dari kondisi seperti ini adalah pendidikan dinilai gagal untuk mencapai tujuannya mencerdaskan bangsa. Bangsa ini ibarat dididik dengan pola pikir yang hanya berorientasi pada ‘nilai di ijazah’ demi kehidupan yang lebih baik, bukan seorang yang cukup kompeten untuk menciptakan ide daripada hanya mengikuti ide yang ada. Satu hal yang saya sadari adalah adanya kasus jual-beli ijazah, calo ujian, dan gelar yang didapatkan dengan mudah, yang menjadi akibat dari pola pikir ‘nilai bagus’.

SUMBER:
http://id.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sistem_pemerintahan
http://edukasi.kompasiana.com/2013/04/26/sebuah-refleksi-mengenai-pendidikan-di-indonesia-dalam-perspektif-kristiani-550487.html

Journal of International Economics

Nama : Anisa Rizky Amalia

Kelas : 2EA06

NPM : 10211925

Journal of International Economics

Market size, division of labor, and firm productivity

 

Abstract

We generalize Krugman's (1979) ‘new trade’ model by allowing for an explicit production chain in which a range of tasks is performed sequentially by a number of specialized teams. We demonstrate that an increase in market size induces a deeper division of labor among these teams which leads to an increase in firm productivity. The paper can be thought of as a formalization of Smith's (1776) famous theorem that the division of labor is limited by the extent of the market. It also sheds light on how market size differences can limit the scope for international technology transfers.

---

Highlights

► We generalize the Krugman (1979) model by introducing specialized production teams. ► We demonstrate that an increase in market size induces a deeper division of labor. ► This shows that the division of labor can be limited by the extent of the market. ► It also implies that market size differences can limit global technology transfers.

JEL classification

• F10;
• F12;
• L22;
• L25

Keywords

• Market size;
• Division of labor;
• Firm productivity;
• Technology transfer

---

Figures and tables from this article:











We are grateful to Pol Antras, Holger Breinlich, Alejandro Cunat, Elhanan Helpman, Gianmarco Ottaviano, Henry Overman, Stephen Redding, and Tony Venables. We also thank the editor, Robert W. Staiger, and two anonymous referees, for their thoughtful comments. All remaining errors are ours. This work extends the second chapter of Ossa's Ph.D. dissertation originally entitled “Trade Liberalization, Outsourcing, and Firm Productivity.

Journal Rankings in Economics: Handle with Care

Journal Rankings in Economics:
Handle with Care

Abstract
Nearly all journal rankings in economics use some weighted average of citations to
calculate a journal’s impact. These rankings are often used, formally or informally, to help
assess the publication success of individual economists or institutions. Although ranking
methods and opinions are legion, scant attention has been paid to the usefulness of any
ranking as representative of the many articles published in a journal. First, because the
distributions of citations across articles within a journal are seriously skewed, and the
skewness differs across journals, the appropriate measure of central tendency is the median
rather than the mean. Second, large shares of articles in the highest-ranked journals are
cited less frequently than typical articles in much-lower-ranked journals. Finally, a ranking
that uses the h-index is very similar to one that uses total citations, making it less than ideal
for assessing the typical impact of articles within a journal. (JEL A11)
JEL classification: A11
Keywords: Journal rankings
∗ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, P.O. Box 442, St. Louis, MO 63166-0442 (mailto:wall@stls.frb.org).
The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily represent official positions of the Federal
Reserve Bank of St. Louis or the Federal Reserve System. I would like to thank Kristie Engemann, Cletus
Coughlin, and Rajdeep Sengupta for their comments and suggestions.
1
I. Introduction
Journal rankings are used to compare institutions and evaluate individual
economists by weighting the journals in which they publish their research (Kalaitzidakis,
Mamuneas, and Stengos, 2003; Dusansky and Vernon, 1998). Because a journal’s ranking
is seen as a good indicator of the research quality of individual papers in the journal many
institutions use rankings either formally or informally to evaluate job seekers, current staff,
etc. Rankings are used in this way because one typically has little more than the journal
name to use as an indicator of a paper’s quality.
For an older paper, citations provide a good measure of its impact and are readily
available from a number of sources. Even so, it is doubtful that evaluators find it worth
their time to collect the necessary data for the many papers and people that they evaluate.
For a more-recent paper, the citation record is probably not long enough to gauge impact,
unless the paper is extremely successful early on. Given this information lag, perhaps the
best (or at least most practical) predictor of future impact is the reputation of the journal in
which the paper is published. Nonetheless, the purpose of this paper is to suggest that
great care should be taken when using the a journal’s ranking is used as a predictor of the
future impact of a specific article.
Although there are many ranking methodologies, and rankings have been used to
make important decisions regarding grants, salary, tenure, promotion, and hiring, little
work has been done to assess how seriously any ranking should be taken. Error bands are
de rigueur in economics, but, somehow, providers of journal rankings have gotten away
with producing little more than point estimates. The average number of citations, however
calculated and adjusted, has been taken as a useful representation of the many articles
2
within a journal. But how confidently can we say that an article in journal A is better than
an article in journal B simply because the average article in A has tended to receive more
citations than the average article in B? This paper follows Oswald (2007) by comparing
the distributions of citations across the articles within journals, with the aim of helping
decisionmakers derive mental error bands around journal rankings. My updated analysis,
with five times as many journals as used by Oswald, should go much further in making the
case that these error bands should be fairly large.
As shown below, citation distributions for journals tend to be skewed heavily by a
small number of high performers. Further, there is significant overlap in citation
distributions across journals to the extent that large percentages of articles published in
low-ranked journals outperform the median of the four most-prestigious journals.
Similarly, large percentages of articles in the most prestigious journals underperform the
median of much-lower-ranked journals. Finally, I show that a ranking that uses the hindex
is very similar to a simple ranking according to total citations, making it unsuitable
as a predictor of the impact of individual articles.
II. The Data and a Simple Mean Ranking
I start with a list of 30 journals that correspond roughly to the top 30 or so journals
identified by Engemann and Wall (2009), which excludes non-refereed or invitation-only
journals (Journal of Economic Literature, Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, and
Journal of Economic Perspectives). I also exclude journals that are primarily finance
because a large percentage of their citations would come from journals outside of
economics and thus might not be suitable for the present analysis. The May Papers and
3
Proceedings issue of the American Economic Review (AER) is treated separately from the
rest of the journal because, as shown below, it is much less selective than the regular issues
of the AER. Almost any list of the top 30 journals includes most of these journals and any
differences are at the low end; however, for the purposes of this paper, it is not important
exactly which journals are in the list. In fact, as will be apparent, my points are
strengthened if I have included some journals that do not belong in the top 30.
I compiled all articles published in 2001 in these 30 journals and tallied the total
number of citations to each article between 2001 and 2008 from all articles included in the
Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) Web of Science database. Note that this excludes
proceedings, editorial material, book reviews, corrections, reviews, meeting abstracts,
biographical items, software reviews, letters, news items, and reprints as identified by the
database. Also note that the citations in 2008 are all those included in the database as of
the day that the data were collected: September 23, 2008.
Table 1 summarizes the citation records of articles in the 30 included journals
relative to the rest of economics. The ISI database lists 6,373 articles published in
economics in 2001, and the 30 included journals represent 1,543 articles, or 24 percent, of
the total. These journals received a disproportionate share of citations: Of the 49,670
citations recorded by the database, 22,805 of them, or 46 percent, are to the included
journals. Put another way, the average number of citations across all of economics was
7.8, the average across the included journals was 14.8, and the average across the excluded
journals was 5.6.1
1 Some additional curiosities: Nineteen percent of articles in economics received no citations at all, while 4
percent of articles in the included journals and 24 percent of articles in the excluded journals were not cited.
4
Journal-level summary statistics are provided in Table 2, where journals are ranked
in declining order of mean citations. This is an extremely simple ranking method in that it
addresses few of the usual measurement concerns. Nearly all of the journal rankings in
economics are based on a quality-weighted average of citations, often using a variant of the
iterative method of Liebowitz and Palmer (1984) and correcting for some combination of
self-citations, article age, and journal size. Also, following Palacios-Huerta and Volij
(2004), some rankings control for differences in reference intensity—that is, differences
across journals in the average number of references.2 The ranking in Table 2 controls only
for journal size and article age, but not for self-citations, the quality of the citing journal, or
reference intensity. Nonetheless, because the purpose of this paper is to shed light on the
properties of journal citations as raw inputs into the various ranking procedures, and not to
provide a journal ranking, a simple ranking is preferable. It is worth noting, however, that
this simple ranking is highly correlated with one that follows all of the best measurement
practices.3
There is nothing surprising about the identities of the journals with the highest
mean number of citations—Quarterly Journal of Economics (QJE), AER, Econometrica,
and Journal of Political Economy (JPE)—although the ranking among them and the
differences between them might be. Specifically, the average article in the QJE was cited
much more frequently (45 times) than were articles in the other three journals (32, 28, and
21 times, respectively). The relative mean impact, which is the number of cites a journal
2 To date, this correction has yet to be adopted widely. Kodrzycki and Yu (2006) have produced the only
other ranking that includes reference intensity, although Engemann and Wall (2009) control for it indirectly.
3 Specifically, the present ranking and that of Engemann and Wall (2009) have a Spearman rank correlation
coefficient of 0.75. In general, journals with exclusively or primarily theoretical papers, such as Review of
Economic Studies, International Economic Review, and Journal of Economic Theory, are the ones whose
ranking is improved the most when best practices are used.
5
received relative to the number of cites to the average article published in the AER, the
profession’s flagship journal, provides a useful number to compare journals to one another.
According to this measure, the average article in the QJE was cited 43 percent more
frequently than was the average article in the AER, whereas the average articles in
Econometrica and the JPE were cited, respectively, 87 and 65 percent as frequently. There
were large differences in citation frequency between the high and low ends of the list. On
average, articles in journals ranked 22nd to 30th were cited between 27 and 31 percent as
frequently as the average AER article. Also, there was a vast middle ranking of journals
(ranked 5th to 21st) with relative mean impacts between 34 and 54 percent.
III. Skewness and a Median Ranking
How well does the mean number of citations summarize the citation tendency of
the typical article within a journal? A look at the maximum and minimum citations
reported in Table 2 provides a hint that the answer to that question might be “not so well.”
The maxima across journals range from 30 to 433, and this top article usually accounted
for 10 percent or more of the total cites received by the journal. In fact, it is not
uncommon for the share of the most-cited article to have exceeded 20 percent of the total.
For example, 38 percent of all citations to the Oxford Economic Papers were to a single
article, while the analogous numbers are 35 percent for the Journal of Applied
Econometrics and 25 percent for the International Economic Review. This phenomenon is
true even for a journal as large and prestigious as the AER, for which 15 percent of its
citations were to just one of its 93 articles. Further, for most journals there were decent
numbers of articles that received no citations at all during the period. The journals with the
6
highest shares of such articles were Oxford Economic Papers (12 percent), International
Economic Review (11 percent), the Journal of Business and Economic Statistics (11
percent), and the Journal of Economic Theory (9 percent).
This quick examination of the high and low ends of citation distributions illustrates
the high variance and the positive skew of any journal’s citations: Citations to a journal are
heavily weighted to a few articles, and many articles are cited relatively infrequently.
Although all journals share these characteristics, there are large cross-journal differences in
variance (which measures the degree of atypicality of the average number of cites). The
five journals with the highest variance relative to mean are the AER, Journal of Applied
Econometrics, AER Papers and Proceedings, Oxford Economic Papers, and
Econometrica. At the other end are four journals with a relative variance below 10:
Journal of Human Resources; Journal of Risk and Uncertainty; Journal of Money, Credit,
and Banking; and Journal of Law and Economic Organization. Skewness, which
measures the extent to which the mean is driven by the high end of the distribution, also
differs a great deal across journals, and not just between high- and low-ranked journals.
For example, the citation distribution of the QJE is the least skewed, while that of the AER
is the most skewed.
The high relative variance and extreme skewness of journals’ citation distributions
indicate that the mean is not the appropriate measure of the central tendency of the
citations received by articles in a journal. The median, which would eliminate the large
effect that a single article can have on the mean, is more appropriate. Accordingly, in
Table 3 the journals are ranked according to their median number of cites.4 As one can
4 As a practical matter, rankings based on the median are almost necessarily outdated because one must wait
several years after an article is published to collect the article-level information, meaning that the ranking is
7
see, it turns out that the two rankings are not really that different from one another.5 There
are, however, some large movements in rank for some journals as we move from Table 2
to Table 3. For example, the Journal of Applied Econometrics is ranked 11 places lower in
the median ranking, while the Journal of Industrial Economics and the AER Papers and
Proceedings fall by seven and five places, respectively. The two journals that improve
their rankings the most are the Journal of Risk and Uncertainty and the Journal of Law and
Economic Organization, which rise by seven and five places, respectively.
Because it is an indicator of how different the journals are from one another,
perhaps the difference between the relative mean and median impacts is more interesting.
Recall that the relative mean impact indicated that the average article in the QJE was cited
43 percent more frequently than the average article in the AER. According to the relative
median impact, however, the distance between the QJE and the AER, as well as the rest of
the journals, is much greater: The median article in the QJE was cited more than twice as
often as the median article in the AER. The use of medians also tends to provide higher
relative impacts for the journals ranked below the AER. Although the journals ranked 3rd
to 30th had an average relative mean impact of 0.4, their average relative median impact
was 0.47. Thus, use of the median reveals that the differences between the AER and the
journals ranked below it are not as large as suggested when one uses the mean, although
the difference between the QJE and all other journals is revealed to be even greater.
based on articles published several years prior to when the ranking is done. In contrast, the information
demands of a mean-based ranking are much less restrictive because one can pool data for recent years. For
example, Engemann and Wall (2009) look at citations received during 2001-07 to articles published during
the same period. Mean-based rankings are, therefore, probably more practical than median-based ones.
Nonetheless, it is useful to know the differences between the two ranking methods so that one has an idea of
how seriously to take the mean-based rankings that will necessarily be done.
5 Their Spearman rank-correlation coefficient is 0.91.
8
IV. Overlapping Distributions
The previous two sections demonstrated the unsuitability of the mean as an
indicator of the central tendency of citations to articles in a journal and showed how the
relative ranking of journals might differ if the median were used instead. This section
moves from a discussion of how to best perform a ranking to one of how seriously to take
any citation-based ranking. Although the median or the mean might be appropriate for
ranking journals, a look at the ends of each journal’s citation distribution provides some
notion of how large one’s mental error bands should be when using such a ranking.
Notice from Table 2 that the most-cited article for every one of the 30 journals
received more citations than did the median article across the four top-ranked journals (19).
In other words, at least one article from each journal had a greater impact than did half of
the articles in the top four journals. So how many other such articles are there for each
journal? And, conversely, given that some articles from even the top journals received
very few or even zero citations, how many articles published in each journal were cited
less often than the median of the bottom four journals? To answer these and related
questions, I split the journals into four tiers: Tiers 1 and 4 are composed of the top and
bottom four journals, respectively. Tier 1 journals all have a relative median impact
greater than 0.7, and Tier 4 journals all have a relative median impact less than 0.3. The
rest of the journals are split into Tiers 2 and 3, which, respectively, have relative median
impacts between 0.5 and 0.7 and between 0.3 and 0.5. The assignment of journals to tiers
is shown in Table 3.
It is also possible to assign individual articles from all the journals to each of these
tiers. Specifically, I define a Tier 1 article as one that was cited at least 19 times (the
9
median article across Tier 1 journals), a Tier 2 article as one that was cited at least 10 times
but fewer than 19 times, a Tier 3 article as one that was cited at least 6 times but fewer than
10 times, and a Tier 4 article as one that was cited no more than 5 times (the median across
the bottom four journals). The shares of each of these four types of article published in
every journal are provided in Table 3.
The first things to note are that every journal has articles in every tier and that there
is a strong tendency for a journal’s ranking to be related to the shares of its articles in the
highest or lowest tiers. This relationship is far from monotonic, however. For example,
nearly 20 percent of the articles in Econometrica and 14 percent of the articles in the AER
were Tier 4 articles, although Tier 4 articles were extremely rare for the QJE, which had
only one. As one would expect, Tier 4 articles were more common in Tier 2 journals than
they were in Tier 1 journals and the frequency might come as a surprise: Thirty-eight
percent of the articles in the Journal of International Economics and 35 percent of the
articles in the Journal of Monetary Economics were Tier 4 articles. Conversely, Tier 1
articles were not uncommon at the low end of the journal ranking: About 12 percent of the
articles in Games and Economic Behavior (from Tier 4) and 27 percent of the articles in
the Journal of Industrial Economics (from Tier 3) were Tier 1 articles.
Figure 1 summarizes the overall tendencies of journals from any tier to have
articles across all four tiers. One lesson from the figure is that the tiers are fairly similar in
the extent to which their articles fall into the middle two tiers—between 33 and 44 percent.
Put another way, the big difference between the journal tiers is in the prevalence of Tier 1
and Tier 4 articles. For another perspective, note that Tier 1 journals publish substantial
numbers of papers at least two tiers below the journals, whereas Tier 4 journals publish
10
substantial numbers of papers at least two tiers above the journals. Specifically, Tier 3 and
4 articles made up 29 percent of the articles published in Tier 1 journals, while Tier 1 and 2
articles made up 27 percent of the articles published in Tier 4 journals.
V. The h-Index
Hirsch (2005), responding to the perceived need for a useful quantitative measure
of individual researchers’ cumulative impact on their fields of research, proposed a simple
index, h, which is defined as the number of papers with citations greater than or equal to h.
To find an individual’s h, one need only to order the person’s papers from the most-cited to
the least-cited. Going down the list, h is where the number of papers is greater than or
equal to the number of citations to the hth paper. Recently, Braun, Glänzel, and Schubert
(2006) proposed using article-level information to derive an h-index for journals. In sync
with the previously noted observations about the skewed distribution of citations, the
advantage of the h-index applied to journals is thought to be that a simple way to combine
both quality and quantity considerations while eliminating the effect that a small number of
articles might have on mean-based measures.
The h-index has become increasingly popular: The Web of Science now provides
h-indices for all journals in its database, and the calculations are dependent on the time
frame chosen by the user. Similarly, RePEc uses the h-index for an experimental journal
ranking, although its database is drawn primarily from so-called gray literature, such as
working papers, and a fairly small and unrepresentative sample of journals.
Because all articles in my data have roughly the same amount of time to
accumulate citations, my data are ideal for ranking journals by their h-index and comparing
11
it with alternatives.6 Keep in mind that because the h-index is a measure of the overall
impact of a journal, whereas the median ranking is meant to measure the impact of a
typical article in a journal, the two rankings are not comparable. The h-index ranking
should instead be compared to a ranking by total citations across all articles in a journal.
Put another way, the h-index can be used to answer a question such as, “What journals
have the greatest total impact in economics?” Median or mean rankings, on the other
hand, address the question, “What kind of an impact is typical for an article in journal X?”
There is no evidence that this important distinction is appreciated by either of the two
sources that use the h-index for economics journals. On the RePEc site, for example, the
h-index stands without qualifications alongside several mean-based rankings.
Table 4 contains the h-index for each of the 30 included journals, along with their
total citations, their total-citations rank, and the difference between the two ranking
methods. Note first how journal size affects the difference between the median rank from
Table 3 and the h-index rank. Most obviously, the AER, AER Papers and Proceedings, the
European Economic Review, and the Journal of Economic Theory (the four largest
journals) leapfrog over journals with substantially higher median or mean citations. Again,
the link between size and the h-index is deliberate in that the index was designed originally
to measure cumulative impact over a researcher’s career, thereby making it less than
desirable for assessing the potential impact of an individual article by looking at the
journal in which it is published.
As is apparent from Table 4, there is little difference between the h-index ranking
and the total-citations ranking. This is not necessarily surprising because they are both
meant to capture total impact. In fact, given that the Spearman rank-correlation coefficient
6 See Braun, Glänzel, and Schubert (2006).
12
for the two methods is 0.98, it does not appear to have been worth the effort to gather
article-level data and calculate the h-index for each journal.
VI. Conclusions
In and of themselves, the rankings in this paper are not intended for actual use
because they use only one year’s publications and do not correct or control for a number of
important factors. Nevertheless, several general tendencies revealed by the analysis should
be helpful in determining the amount of care to take when employing journal rankings.
First, the appropriate measure of central tendency is the median rather than the mean, a
correction that can lead to substantial changes in the ranking of individual journals, but
which yields a ranking that differs little overall. Second, large percentages of articles in
the highest-ranked journals are cited less frequently than are typical articles in muchlower-
ranked journals. Similarly, large percentages of articles in the lowest-ranked
journals are cited more frequently than are typical articles in much-higher-ranked journals.
Finally, a ranking that uses the h-index is very similar to one that uses total citations,
meaning that it is of little use for assessing the relative quality of research published in a
journal.
13
References
Braun, Tibor; Glänzel, Wolfgang and Schubert, András. “A Hirsch-Type Index for
Journals.” Scientometrics, April 2006, 69(1), pp. 169-73.
Dusansky, Richard and Vernon, Clayton J. “Rankings of U.S. Economics Departments.”
Journal of Economic Perspectives, Winter 1998, 12(1), pp. 157-70.
Engemann, Kristie M. and Wall, Howard J. “A Journal Ranking for the Ambitious
Economist.” Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Review, May/June 2009,
forthcoming.
Hirsch, Jorge E. “An Index to Quantify an Individual’s Scientific Research Output.”
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, November 2005, 102(46), pp.
16569-72.
Kalaitzidakis, Pantelis; Mamuneas, Theofanis P. and Stengos, Thanasis. “Rankings of
Academic Journals and Institutions in Economics.” Journal of the European
Economic Association, December 2003, 1(6), pp. 1346-66.
Kodrzycki, Yolanda K. and Yu, Pingkang D. “New Approaches to Ranking Economics
Journals.” Contributions to Economic Analysis and Policy, 2006, 5(1), Article 24.
Liebowitz, Stanley J. and Palmer, John P. “Assessing the Relative Impacts of Economics
Journals.” Journal of Economic Literature, March 1984, 22(1), pp. 77-88.
Oswald, Andrew J. “An Examination of the Reliability of Prestigious Scholarly Journals:
Evidence and Implications for Decision-Makers.” Economica, February 2007,
74(293), pp. 21-31.
Palacios-Huerta, Ignacio and Volij, Oscar. “The Measurement of Intellectual Influence.”
Econometrica, May 2004, 72(3), pp. 963-77.
14
Table 1. Summary Citation Characteristics of Journals
Number
of
Articles
Number
of
Citations
Mean
Citations
Article
Share
Citation
Share
Percent
Never
Cited
All journals (230) 6,373 49,670 7.8 1.00 1.00 0.19
30 included journals 1,543 22,805 14.8 0.24 0.46 0.04
200 excluded journals 4,830 26,865 5.6 0.76 0.54 0.24
Data are for citations in 2001-2008 to articles published in 2001, according to the ISI Web of
Science® as of September 23, 2008.
15
Table 2. The Numbers and Distributions of Journal Citations
Mean
Rank Journal
Number of
Articles
Mean
Citations
Relative
Mean
Impact
Citation
Maximum
Max
Article’s
Share
Citation
Minimum
Share
with Zero
Citations
Relative
Variance Skewness
1 Quarterly Journal of Economics 42 45.4 1.43 136 0.07 1 0.00 20.5 0.82
2 American Economic Review 93 31.7 1.00 433 0.15 0 0.02 74.3 6.34
3 Econometrica 66 27.6 0.87 194 0.11 0 0.03 38.1 2.65
4 Journal of Political Economy 44 20.6 0.65 76 0.08 3 0.00 16.2 1.31
5 Journal of International Economics 61 17.1 0.54 91 0.09 0 0.02 21.6 2.04
6 Rand Journal of Economics 37 16.6 0.52 127 0.21 0 0.03 30.9 3.60
7 Journal of Economic Growth 14 16.4 0.52 46 0.20 1 0.00 11.3 0.92
8 Journal of Labor Economics 32 15.0 0.47 70 0.15 3 0.00 14.5 2.49
9 American Economic Review, Pap. and Proc. 84 14.7 0.46 194 0.16 0 0.02 39.5 5.43
10 Review of Economic Studies 38 13.8 0.44 93 0.18 1 0.00 19.8 3.37
11 Journal of Monetary Economics 51 13.6 0.43 54 0.08 0 0.02 11.7 1.37
12 Journal of Applied Econometrics 35 13.4 0.42 164 0.35 0 0.06 57.4 4.98
13 Journal of Econometrics 77 13.1 0.41 97 0.10 0 0.03 22.4 2.86
14 Review of Economics and Statistics 67 13.1 0.41 69 0.08 0 0.03 12.7 2.10
15 Journal of Industrial Economics 26 12.6 0.40 54 0.16 0 0.08 17.0 1.45
16 Journal of Business and Economic Statistics 45 12.0 0.38 54 0.10 0 0.11 16.6 2.03
17 European Economic Review 98 12.0 0.38 112 0.10 0 0.04 24.4 3.96
18 Journal of Law and Economic Organization 19 11.9 0.38 46 0.20 0 0.05 9.8 1.81
19 Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 27 11.3 0.36 39 0.13 1 0.00 8.1 1.29
20 Economic Journal 66 11.3 0.36 106 0.14 0 0.06 27.8 4.02
21 Journal of Law and Economics 31 10.6 0.34 42 0.13 0 0.03 10.5 2.03
22 Journal of Public Economics 75 9.9 0.31 56 0.08 0 0.07 10.1 2.14
23 Journal of Urban Economics 48 9.5 0.30 61 0.13 0 0.02 11.6 3.03
24 Games and Economic Behavior 59 9.3 0.29 61 0.11 0 0.07 15.8 2.48
25 Journal of Human Resources 30 9.1 0.29 30 0.11 0 0.03 7.3 1.08
26 International Economic Review 45 8.9 0.28 102 0.25 0 0.11 29.1 4.75
27 Journal of Development Economics 69 8.7 0.27 68 0.11 0 0.06 12.7 3.26
28 Oxford Economic Papers 33 8.5 0.27 105 0.38 0 0.12 38.9 4.98
29 Journal of Economic Theory 87 8.4 0.27 54 0.07 0 0.09 10.2 2.37
30 Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking 44 8.4 0.27 32 0.09 0 0.07 8.6 1.46
Citations are from 2001-2008 to articles published in 2001 according to the ISI Web of Science® as of September 23, 2008.
16
Table 3. Median Citations and Overlaps in Citation Distributions
Median
Rank* Journal
Median
Citations
Relative
Median
Impact
Tier 1
Share
Tier 2
Share
Tier 3
Share
Tier 4
Share
1 Quarterly Journal of Economics 36.5 2.15 0.786 0.143 0.048 0.024
2 American Economic Review 17 1.00 0.495 0.183 0.183 0.140
3 Econometrica 16.5 0.97 0.470 0.197 0.136 0.197
Tier
1
4 Journal of Political Economy 12.5 0.74 0.341 0.273 0.273 0.114
5 Journal of Economic Growth 11.5 0.68 0.429 0.143 0.214 0.214
6 Journal of International Economics 11 0.65 0.311 0.197 0.115 0.377
7 Journal of Labor Economics 10.5 0.62 0.219 0.344 0.219 0.219
8 Rand Journal of Economics 10 0.59 0.297 0.243 0.189 0.270
9 Review of Economic Studies 10 0.59 0.184 0.316 0.158 0.342
10 Journal of Monetary Economics 9 0.53 0.255 0.235 0.157 0.353
11 Review of Economics and Statistics 9 0.53 0.194 0.299 0.224 0.284
12 Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 9 0.53 0.222 0.222 0.222 0.333
Tier
2
13 Journal of Law and Economic Organization 9 0.53 0.158 0.263 0.263 0.316
14 American Economic Review, Pap. and Proc. 8 0.47 0.190 0.250 0.190 0.369
15 Journal of Business and Economic Statistics 7 0.41 0.178 0.222 0.244 0.356
16 Journal of Econometrics 7 0.41 0.182 0.195 0.247 0.377
17 Journal of Law and Economics 7 0.41 0.129 0.194 0.387 0.290
18 Journal of Public Economics 7 0.41 0.173 0.213 0.200 0.413
19 European Economic Review 7 0.41 0.173 0.245 0.153 0.429
20 Journal of Urban Economics 7 0.41 0.146 0.146 0.333 0.375
21 Journal of Human Resources 6.5 0.38 0.167 0.233 0.133 0.467
22 Journal of Industrial Economics 6 0.35 0.269 0.115 0.154 0.462
23 Journal of Applied Econometrics 6 0.35 0.229 0.143 0.143 0.486
24 Economic Journal 6 0.35 0.121 0.197 0.212 0.470
25 Journal of Economic Theory 6 0.35 0.115 0.195 0.207 0.483
Tier
3
26 Journal of Development Economics 6 0.35 0.101 0.217 0.203 0.478
27 Games and Economic Behavior 5 0.29 0.119 0.186 0.153 0.542
28 Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking 5 0.29 0.114 0.205 0.159 0.523
29 International Economic Review 5 0.29 0.111 0.111 0.200 0.578
Tier
4
30 Oxford Economic Papers 4 0.24 0.061 0.152 0.152 0.636
* The ratio of Tier 1 and Tier 4 shares is used as a tiebreaker.
17
Table 4. Rankings Based on Total Citations and the h-Index
Total
Citations
Rank by
Total
Citations h-index
h-Index
Rank*
Difference
in Rank**
American Economic Review 2,948 1 33 1 0
Quarterly Journal of Economics 1,907 2 28 2 0
Econometrica 1,822 3 23 3 0
Journal of International Economics 1,043 6 19 4 -2
American Economic Review, Pap. and Proc. 1,235 4 17 5 1
European Economic Review 1,176 5 17 6 1
Journal of Econometrics 1,009 7 17 7 0
Journal of Political Economy 906 8 16 8 0
Review of Economics and Statistics 878 9 16 9 0
Journal of Public Economics 743 11 16 10 -1
Journal of Monetary Economics 694 13 16 11 -2
Journal of Economic Theory 731 12 14 12 0
Economic Journal 746 10 13 13 3
Rand Journal of Economics 614 14 13 14 0
Review of Economic Studies 524 18 13 15 -3
Journal of Labor Economics 480 19 13 16 -3
Journal of Development Economics 600 15 12 17 2
Games and Economic Behavior 549 16 12 18 2
Journal of Business and Economic Statistics 540 17 12 19 2
Journal of Applied Econometrics 469 20 12 20 0
Journal of Urban Economics 456 21 11 21 0
Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking 370 23 11 22 -1
Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 305 26 11 23 -3
International Economic Review 401 22 10 24 2
Journal of Law and Economics 329 24 10 25 1
Journal of Industrial Economics 328 25 10 26 1
Journal of Human Resources 273 28 10 27 -1
Journal of Economic Growth 230 29 9 28 -1
Journal of Law and Economic Organization 226 30 9 29 -1
Oxford Economic Papers 281 27 8 30 3
* Ties are broken by total citations.
** The difference between the h-index rank and the total-citations rank.
Figure 1. Shares of Article Types Across Journal Tiers
0.51
0.20
0.16
0.13
0.25 0.26
0.18
0.31
0.16
0.21 0.21
0.42
0.10
0.17 0.17
0.56
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
Tier 1 Articles Tier 2 Articles Tier 3 Articles Tier 4 Articles
Shares of Article Types
Tier 1 Journals Tier 2 Journals Tier 3 Journals Tier 4 Journals

International Journal of Consumer Behavior

 International Journal of Consumer Behavior

CONSUMER BEHAVIOR INTER CULTURAL

Abstract World economy increasingly cross-culture. for next decade, as marketers entering new international markets, an understanding of how culture influences consumer behavior will be very important for both managers and researchers consument. article presents a framework that integrates and interprets current research in cross-cultural behavior consumer. Framework also serves to identify areas that require further research and can be used as a template for marketers seek to understand the foreign consumer markets and international they competition. globalization requires enterprises to operate within Multicultural. Several attempts have been made to develop an integrative view of current cross-cultural research on the behavior consumer., but some models of cultural influence on consumer behavior does not offer a framework in which literature can be sufficiently integrated, not strictly based on the theory, or does not contain a full report on how certain cultural dimensions influence consumer behavior specific components.

INTERNATIONAL MARKETING REVIEW 

In some cases, researchers have succeeded in providing a clear managerial model of cross-cultural consumer behavior (eg Samli, 1995). Our framework build on the work and efforts with: 1. offer good cultural dimensionalization easy tooperationalize and theoretically rigorous; 2. provide a widely accepted definition of consumer behavior in terms of its components is not simply a list of topics consumer behavior that may or may not be influenced by culture, and 3. comprehensively integrate and interpret current research in the light of each of the manifestations of the interaction between culture and consumer behavior in the framework of the proposed components.  

As Douglas et al. (1994) suggest, our framework combines different sources,research traditions and methodological philosophy about how to do cross-culturals crutiny. Consumer behavior between Cultures From the perspective adopted, two definitions of culture, emik and ethics, may be considered as two sides of the same coin. Culture is the lens, forming a reality, and blueprints, determines the action plan. At the same time, culture is unique to a group of people take advantage specific. scrutiny provided by the second approach, we gain a more complete understanding of the culture. we now will discuss a model that describes the influence of the culture of reciprocity and behavior consumer culture and individual behavior is the result of the individual's cultural value system to a certain context. Individual's cultural system of values developed over time as they socialized into the culture and subculture particular.

Community cluster area and family values all affect the formation individuals. With cultural value system, the values of culture system includes elements of individual cultures- individuals have in common with the group (s) in which they are located, as well as special values unique to individuals. as model shows, cultural influence consumer behavior, which in itself can strengthen cultural manifestations (Peter and Olson, 1998) An individual consumption behavior can be viewed and copied or rejected by this other. case then can become the norm group behavior and identified as part of the culture of a particular population. The influence of values on consumer behavior Value and cognition. In their study, McCort and Malhotra (1993) describes a number of studies on the influence of cultural values on information processing issues such as categories of perception, inference and learning perceptions.

We now continue to explore the cross-cultural research that still exist today consumer behavior in the light of our frame work. The influence of values on consumer behavior Value and cognition. In their study, McCort and Malhotra (1993) describesome research on the influence of cultural values on information processingissues such as categories of perception, inference and learning perceptions. To For example, several studies have examined the effect of culture on cognitiveprocesses such as perception of time (for example BergadaaÁ 1990). Similarly, Aaker andSchmitt (1997) tested the influence of cultural orientation, operationalized togetherdimensions of individualism-collectivism, self-construal on. In the run experiment, Aaker and Schmitt (1997) found that both individualist and collectivist consumers use brands for self-expressive purposes (like inMcCracken, 1988).

They use the mark, however, in a different way: the collectivist consumers use the brand to reassert their similarity with the reference group of their members, while the individualist consumer to use the mark to distinguish yourself from others reference. Developing consumer ethno centrism is often studied by cross-cultural researchers. The building, as operationalized by Shimp and Sharma (1987),can be viewed as instrumental values (Rokeach, 1973). In their study,Shimp and Sharma (1987) found that consumer ethno centrism determine their perception of foreign than domestic products (cognition), and their attitudes and behavior. Other studies of the value-cognition relations had taken a emik perspective. McCracken (1988, p. 73) clarify the meaning of cultural categories: `` coordinate fundamental cultural categories of meaning. They represent the cultural differences that divide the bottom up'' phenomenal world. Category similar to developing psychological schemata. They help individuals organize and give meaning to the world.  

There are several kinds of cultural categories: categories of time, space, nature, and people. One of the most important ways in which the categories are supported through the consumption of goods. Cultural categories were formed according to the principles of culture, or values. Similarly, D'Andrade (1992) also explains how mental schemas that are influenced by culture. Thus, the anthropological view of culture also recognizes that cognitive constructs (ie category) as determined by the manifestation of culture (ie values). Value and affect. a number of study examined the role of cultural values in the process of attitude formation. We can distinguish between advertising and behavioral research consument. Affect to advertising and / or products are two of the most important gauge of the success of the advertisement. Therefore, the number of researchers have examined affective advertising variables in cross-cultural advertising. In particular, several studies have sought to ascertain the role of cultural values in ad-irritated.

For example, Taylor et al. (1997) compared high and low context effect of symbols on consumer behavior and cognition symbol. Most of the research in this area has been to investigate the effect of language on consumer cognition ', for the most part in advertising acontext. The study of cognition and cognitive structure lends itself naturally to being learned through the tools of cognitive psychology. Therefore, the few studies in this area apply psycholinguistic theory to consumer information processing. Language study in the advertisement has experienced increased attention from researchers. For example, Luna and Peracchio (1999) extend the two theories developed by researchers in psycholinguistics to ads targeting bilingual consumers. Schmitt et al. (1994) compares the speaker of Chinese and English and language implications of structural differences have for consumer information processing and mental representations (whether visually or auditorily information presented example is remembered better).

The effect of rituals on consumer behavior Several cross-cultural studies to explore the role of ritual in consumer behavior.One exception is the (1991) study of ritual Mehta and Belk proprietary India and Indian immigrants to the United States. The authors explain the use of property by immigrants in securing identitas. treasure regarded as a symbol of India to maintain their identity in a public setting, and ownership ritual help shape their cognitive structures, their perceptions about self. Arnould (1989) explained the process of the formation of preferences in ritual behavior in the Republic Niger and also how rituals influence consumer behavior in culture.

Solomon and Anand (1985) describe how the female Rite in New York contemporary clothing consumption. Relationship determine the values, symbols, rituals and consumer behavioris a complicated, data in this study indicate that this [ritual] is probably the aggregate identity preservation strategy anchored in symbols more concrete''. So, the ritual may not reflect the values of the culture in which the ritual originated. Indian food can be eaten by Indian immigrants in the United States (ritual), butpurity teachings ignored food (traditional Indian cultural values). On the other hand,ritual functions as a physical sign to secure an identity. Researchershould investigate the complex relationships in future studies, especially because they happen to each of the three components of consumer behavior: cognition, affect, and behavior.

Conclusion This article provides a framework that integrates and interprets current research in cross-cultural work is practical behavior consumer.framework nature in that it can easily be operationalized by the manager and the consumerresearchers interested in understanding how consumer culture shapebehavior. This framework is distilled from the more general's model of relationship between culture and behavior consument. Manager can useframe work as a template to examine how consumers in foreign markets willreact to the product or service. For example, marketers enter the foreign country to study each cell in Table I to identify potential culturerelated problems or issues. Academic researchers will find useful framework for identifying current body of literature strength and areas that require moreperhatian. Besides therefore, this article attempts to reconcile the two approaches incultural studies as it affects consumer behavior. Ethics and philosophy emikseen as two sides of the same coin, each complementing the other. Through integration of previous work on cross-cultural consumer behavior, weframework provides a global view of the interaction of culture and consumer behavior. Consumer researchers now need to investigate the district inframe work, there is a lack of rigorous studies.

ANALYSIS : From the perspective adopted, two definitions of culture, emik and ethics, may be considered as two sides of the same coin. Culture is the lens, forming a reality, and blueprints, determines the action plan. At the same time, culture is unique to a group of people take advantage certain. With scrutiny provided by the second approach, we gain a more complete understanding of the culture (s). We now will discuss a model that describes the influence of the culture of reciprocity and behavior consumer.

Cinderella story

 

Nama : Anisa Rizky Amalia

Kelas : 2EA06

NPM : 10211925

CINDERELLA STORY

 

Once upon a time, there was a young girl named Cinderella. She lived with her step mother and two step sisters.
The step mother and sisters were conceited and bad tempered. They treated Cinderella very badly. Her step mother made Cinderella do the hardest works in the house; such as scrubbing the floor, cleaning the pot and pan and preparing the food for the family. The two step sisters, on the other hand, did not work about the house. Their mother gave them many handsome dresses to wear.
One day, the two step sister received an invitation to the ball that the king’s son was going to give at the palace. They were excited about this and spent so much time choosing the dresses they would wear. At last, the day of the ball came, and away went the sisters to it. Cinderella could not help crying after they had left.
“Why are crying, Cinderella?” a voice asked. She looked up and saw her fairy godmother standing beside her, “because I want so much to go to the ball” said Cinderella. “Well” said the godmother,”you’ve been such a cheerful, hardworking, uncomplaining girl that I am going to see that you do go to the ball”.
Magically, the fairy godmother changed a pumpkin into a fine coach and mice into a coachman and two footmen. Her godmother tapped Cinderella’s raged dress with her wand, and it became a beautiful ball gown. Then she gave her a pair of pretty glass slippers. “Now, Cinderella”, she said; “You must leave before midnight”. Then away she drove in her beautiful coach.
Cinderella was having a wonderfully good time. She danced again and again with the king’s son. Suddenly the clock began to strike twelve, she ran toward the door as quickly as she could. In her hurry, one of her glass slipper was left behind.
A few days later, the king’ son proclaimed that he would marry the girl whose feet fitted the glass slipper. Her step sisters tried on the slipper but it was too small for them, no matter how hard they squeezed their toes into it. In the end, the king’s page let Cinderella try on the slipper. She stuck out her foot and the page slipped the slipper on. It fitted perfectly.
Finally, she was driven to the palace. The king’s son was overjoyed to see her again. They were married and live happily ever after.

Ricardo kaka biography

Nama : Anisa Rizky Amalia

Kelas : 2EA06

NPM : 10211925

RICARDO KAKA BIOGRAPHY

 
Kaká was born to Simone Cristina dos Santos Leite and Bosco Izecson Pereira Leite. He has a younger brother, Rodrigo (known as Digão), who has followed in Kaká's footsteps by playing football for Milan.
He suffered a career-threatening and possibly paralysis-inducing spine fracture at the age of 18 as a result of a swimming pool accident, but remarkably made a full recovery. He attributes his recovery to God and since tithed his income to his church.

A devout evangelical Christian, Kaká became engrossed in religion at the age of 12: "I learnt that it is faith that decides whether something will happen or not." He removed his jersey to reveal an "I Belong to Jesus" T-shirt and openly engaged in prayer moments after the final whistle of Milan's 2007 Champions League triumph. Kaká previously sported the same shirt during Milan's 2004 Scudetto celebration and after Brazil's defeat of Germany in the 2002 World Cup final, and had the same phrase, along with "God Is Faithful," stitched onto the tongues of his boots.During the postmatch celebration following Brazil's 4–1 win over Argentina in the 2005 FIFA Confederations Cup final, he and several of his teammates, among them backup keeper Gomes and defender Lúcio, wore T-shirts with "Jesus Loves You" printed on them in various languages.

Kaká is a member of the organization Atletas de Cristo ("Athletes of Christ"). His goal celebration consists of him pointing to the sky as a gesture of thanks to God, and he is proud that he was a virgin when he married. His favorite music is gospel music,and his favorite book is the Bible. Since November 2004, he has served as an Ambassador Against Hunger for the United Nations' World Food Programme, the youngest to do so at the time of his appointment.

Kaká was sworn in as an Italian citizen on February 12, 2007.He features prominently in Adidas advertising and also has a modeling contract with Armani, but the latter prevented him from appearing in a photo collection alongside his Milan teammates that was published by Dolce & Gabbana in early 2007. He married his childhood sweetheart Caroline Celico on 23 December 2005 at the evangelical Reborn in Christ Church in São Paulo, Brazil. Caroline is currently pregnant with their first child.

The Reborn in Christ Church, of which Kaká is a member, is currently under investigation in connection with its leaders, Estevam Hernandes Filho and Sonia Hernandes, who were sentenced to prison in August 2007 on money smuggling charges. Kaká, who has not been charged, was an annual donor to the church with contributions totaling nearly $1 million. He was sent a questionnaire by Brazilian authorities inquiring about connections with the leaders, but his spokesman denied that Kaká had actually received any such documents.

Kaká began his club career with São Paulo at the age of eight. He signed a contract at 15 and led the SPFC youth squad to Copa de Juvenil glory. Kaká made his senior side debut in January 2001 and scored 12 goals in 27 appearances, in addition to leading São Paulo to its first and only Torneio Rio-São Paulo championship. He scored 10 in 22 matches the following season, and by this time his performance was soon attracting attention from European clubs.


AC Milan, fresh from winning the 2003 Champions League, brought him aboard in 2003 for $8.5 million, a fee described in hindsight as "peanuts" by club owner Silvio Berlusconi.Within a month, he cracked the starting lineup, and has remained there since. His Serie A debut was in a 2–0 Milan win at A.C. Ancona. He scored 10 goals in 30 appearances that season, as Milan won the Scudetto and the European Super Cup.

Kaká was a part of the five-man midfield in the 2004–05 season, usually playing in a withdrawn role behind striker Andriy Shevchenko. He scored 7 goals in 36 domestic appearances as Milan finished runner-up to Juventus. Despite Milan losing the 2004–05 Champions League final to Liverpool F.C. on penalties, he was nonetheless voted the best midfielder of the tournament, and also finished ninth, with 19 votes, in the running for the 2005 Ballon D'Or.

The 2005–06 season saw Kaká score his first hat-tricks in domestic and European competition. On April 9, 2006, he scored his first Rossoneri hat-trick against Chievo Verona. All three goals were scored in the second half. Seven months later, he scored his first Champions League hat-trick in a 4–1 group stage win over RSC Anderlecht. The football world was beginning to take notice of a superstar in the making. Following Rui Costa's departure to Benfica at the end of the season, and despite the insistence of many Milan fans, Kaká turned down the chance to switch from his number 22 to the now-vacant number 10, a number typically associated with world-class playmakers. (The number was eventually claimed by teammate Clarence Seedorf.)

Shevchenko's departure to Chelsea FC for the 2006–07 season allowed Kaká to become the focal point of Milan's offense as he alternated between the midfield and striker positions. He finished as the top scorer in the 2006–07 CL campaign with ten goals, which proved a catalyst in steering Milan back to European success. One of them helped the Rossoneri beat Celtic FC 1–0 after extra time in the quarterfinals on a 1–0 aggregate, and three others proved fatal for Manchester United in the semifinals despite Milan losing the first leg. Following the convincing 3–0 second-leg defeat at the San Siro on May 2 that knocked out the English champions, Manchester United manager Sir Alex Ferguson declared that Kaka was one of the two best players in the world, alongside his charge Cristiano Ronaldo.The previous month, a panel of experts set up by Italian publication Gazzetta dello Sport proclaimed Kaká as the world's best footballer. Shevchenko also included his endorsement, while suggesting that Kaká deserved to win the Ballon D'Or.

Kaká added the Champions League title to his trophy case for the first time when Milan defeated Liverpool F.C. 2–1 in Athens on May 23, 2007. Though he went scoreless, he won a free kick that led to the first of Filippo Inzaghi's two goals, and provided the assist for the second. For his stellar play throughout the competition, he was voted the Vodafone Fans' Player of the Season in a poll of over 100,000 UEFA.com visitors. In June 2007, German football publication Kicker named him the world's best player, with Cristiano Ronaldo and Ronaldinho finishing second and third, respectively, while he was also given this honor by UK publication The Times. On August 30, 2007, Kaká was named by UEFA as both the top forward of the 2006–07 CL season and Club Footballer of the Year.

He played his 200th career match with Milan in a 1–1 home draw with Calcio Catania on September 30, 2007, and on October 5, he was named the 2006–07 FIFPro World Player of the Year.

On December 2, 2007, Kaká was officially announced as the European Footballer of the Year, becoming the eighth Milan player in history to receive the honor. He finished with a decisive 444 votes, far ahead of runner-up Cristiano Ronaldo. Upon accepting the award in Paris, he said, "It was an exceptional year and the Ballon D'or crowns an extraordinary 2007...I want to thank God who allowed me to be here today. I thank my wife, my parents and Milan, the team that allowed me to win. I also thank my teammates, both at Milan and Brazil, and all of the fans."

Kaká made his debut for Brazil in January 2002 against Bolivia. He was part of the 2002 FIFA World Cup-winning squad, but played only 19 minutes, all of which were in the first round match against Costa Rica. During the final against Germany, coach Luiz Felipe Scolari was reportedly about to send Kaká on as a substitute, but he never made it into the game as the referee did not notice him waving on the sidelines to enter the pitch.

In 2003, Kaká was the captain for the Gold Cup tournament, where Brazil finished as runner-up, as did Kaká with a second-best three goals. He was also named as one of the competition's top eleven players by position. On June 29, 2005, he scored in a 4–1 defeat of Argentina in the 2005 Confederations Cup final, with a powerful shot into the upper right-hand corner of the net. He finished in joint tenth place in the voting for the 2004 FIFA World Player of the Year award, and finished two spots higher the following year.

Kaká started in his first FIFA World Cup Finals in 2006, scoring his first and only goal in a 1-0 victory over Croatia in Brazil's opening match. He was unable to keep up his momentum for the remainder of the tournament as Brazil were eliminated by France in the quarterfinals. On September 3, 2006, he scored again for Brazil, receiving the ball off a deflection from an Argentina corner kick and taking the ball down three quarters of the field to score.

On May 12, 2007, citing an exhaustive schedule of Serie A, Champions League and national team play, Kaká openly bowed out of the 2007 Copa América, which was won by Brazil. "I haven't had a break for three seasons. I won't have the form to achieve what is expected of me at an international level."Brazil coach Dunga took the optimistic route, declaring that while he was disappointed about Kaká's decision, his absence would subsequently free up a roster spot for a lesser-used player.Kaká, however, did play 70 minutes of Brazil's 1–1 friendly draw with England on June 1, but only 30 in a goalless draw with Turkey on June 5.