Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Coercion in the Pustejovsky framework refers to both complement coercion and aspectual coercion. Complement coercion involves a mismatch of semantic meaning between lexical items, while aspectual coercion involves a mismatch of temporality between lexical items. [4] A commonly used example of complement coercion is the sentence "I began the ...
Compellence is a form of coercion that attempts to get an actor (such as a state) to change its behavior through threats to use force or the actual use of limited force. [1] [2] [3] Compellence can be more clearly described as "a political-diplomatic strategy that aims to influence an adversary's will or incentive structure.
On the one hand, demand refers to the demand curve. Changes in supply are depicted graphically by a shift in the supply curve to the left or right. [1] Changes in the demand curve are usually caused by 5 major factors, namely: number of buyers, consumer income, tastes or preferences, price of related goods and future expectations.
Coercion used as leverage may force victims to act in a way contrary to their own interests. Coercion can involve not only the infliction of bodily harm, but also psychological abuse (the latter intended to enhance the perceived credibility of the threat). The threat of further harm may also lead to the acquiescence of the person being coerced.
A change in quantity demanded is represented by a movement along the demand curve, while a change in demand is represented by a shift of the demand curve. [12] In popular usage a change in "demand" can refer to either what economists call a change in demand or what economists call a change in quantity demanded.
Demand for a good is said to be elastic when the elasticity is greater than one. A good with an elasticity of −2 has elastic demand because quantity demanded falls twice as much as the price increase; an elasticity of −0.5 has inelastic demand because the change in quantity demanded change is half of the price increase. [2]
As with other models of power, this framework is neutral as to the use of 'coercion'. For example, a threat of violence can change the likely costs and benefits of different actions; so can a financial penalty in a 'voluntarily agreed' contract, or indeed a friendly offer.
The equation demonstrates that the change in the demand for a good caused by a price change is the result of two effects: a substitution effect: when the price of a good change, as it becomes relatively cheaper, consumer consumption could hypothetically remain unchanged. If so, income would be freed up, and money could be spent on one or more ...