David Rosenbaum – författare

It's a Jungle in There pursues the hypothesis that the overarching theory of biology, Darwin's theory, should be the overarching theory of cognitive psychology. David Rosenbaum, a cognitive psychologist and former editor of the Journal of Experimental Psychology, proposes that the phenomena of cognitive psychology can be understood as emergent interactions among neural elements that compete and cooperate in a kind of inner jungle. This perspective allows Rosenbaum to present cognitive psychology in a new way, both for students (for whom the book is mainly intended) and for seasoned investigators (who may be looking for a fresh way to approach and understand their material). Rather than depicting the discipline as a rag-tag collection of miscellaneous facts, as has generally been the case in textbooks, this book presents cognitive psychology under a single rubric: "It's a jungle in there." Making continual reference to hypothetical neural creatures eking out their livings in a tough environment, the book offers an over-arching principle that will both entertain readers and motivate more in-depth study of the mind and brain.

Economic theorizing suggests that firms can acquire and maintain market dominance in a number of ways. Some economists argue that firms attain dominance only by being relatively more efficient than their rivals and retain leadership only by staying more efficient than their rivals. Others argue that efficiency is not the only source of dominance and that leaders can retain preeminence even if they are inefficient. This book attempts to sort out the relevant points by exploring market dominance experienced by firms in ten different industries. It examines factors that led to acquiring, holding and in some cases losing dominance and asks whether those factors were consistent with economic efficiency.The results suggest that both schools make valid points. Generally, firms that rose to dominance were market pioneers and did so using economically-efficient strategies. In some cases, however, firms rose to dominance using inefficient strategies. Once they reached their ascendance, these firms engaged in a number of strategies, some efficient, others inefficient, to maintain their dominant positions. Most of the firms examined eventually lost their dominance. In some cases, the market evolved too rapidly for any firm to maintain control. In other cases the fall was ushered along by federal antitrust and trade policy. In still other industries, it was due either to poor management or the firm becoming inefficient. However, even when some of these dominant firms became inefficient, the market system worked only very slowly to remove them. The analysis has specific implications for antitrust policies toward dominant firms. Because the sources and consequences of dominance can be varied, neither a ^Ilaissez faire^R policy in favor nor a ^Iper se^R injunction against dominance is called for. A reasoned approach, tempered by underlying market conditions, is warranted toward the strategies used to acquire and maintain dominance.