Most people have strong left-brain lateralisation for language, with a minority showing right- or bilateral language representation. On some receptive language tasks, however, lateralisation appears to be reduced or absent. This contrasting pattern raises the question of whether and how language laterality may fractionate within individuals. Building on our prior work, we postulated (a) that there can be dissociations in lateralisation of different components of language, and (b) these would be more common in left-handers. A subsidiary hypothesis was that laterality indices will cluster according to two underlying factors corresponding to whether they involve generation of words or sentences, versus receptive language. We tested these predictions in two stages: At Step 1 an online laterality battery (Dichotic listening, Rhyme Decision and Word Comprehension) was given to 621 individuals (56% left-handers); At Step 2, functional transcranial Doppler ultrasound (fTCD) was used with 230 of these individuals (51% left-handers). 108 left-handers and 101 right-handers gave useable data on a battery of three language generation and three receptive language tasks. Neither the online nor fTCD measures supported the notion of a single language laterality factor. In general, for both online and fTCD measures, tests of language generation were left-lateralised. In contrast, the receptive tasks were at best weakly left-lateralised or, in the case of Word Comprehension, slightly right-lateralised. The online measures were only weakly correlated, if at all, with fTCD measures. Most of the fTCD measures had split-half reliabilities of at least .7, and showed a distinctive pattern of intercorrelation, supporting a modified two-factor model in which Phonological Decision (generation) and Sentence Decision (reception) loaded on both factors. The same factor structure fitted data from left- and right-handers, but mean scores on the two factors were lower (less left-lateralised) in left-handers. There are at least two factors influencing language lateralization in individuals, but they do not correspond neatly to language generation and comprehension. Future fMRI studies could help clarify how far they reflect activity in specific brain regions.

Studies have highlighted an association between motor laterality and speech production laterality. It is thought that common demands for sequential processing may underlie this association. However, most studies in this area have relied on relatively small samples and have infrequently explored the reliability of the tools used to assess lateralization. We, therefore, established the validity and reliability of an online battery measuring sequence-based motor laterality and language laterality before exploring the associations between laterality indices on language and motor tasks. The online battery was completed by 621 participants, 52 of whom returned to complete the battery a second time. The three motor tasks included in the battery showed good between-session reliability (r ≥ .78) and were lateralized in concordance with hand preference. The novel measure of speech production laterality was left lateralized at population level as predicted, but reliability was less satisfactory (r = .62). We found no evidence of an association between sequence-based motor laterality and language laterality. Those with a left-hand preference were more strongly lateralized on motor tasks requiring midline crossing; this effect was not observed in right-handers. We conclude that there is little evidence of the co-lateralization of language and sequence-based motor skill on this battery.

Purpose: This paper identifies and prioritises the prominent barriers to blockchain technology (BCT) adoption in food supply chains (FSCs) and the interrelationships among these barriers and demonstrates how integrating BCT can enhance sustainability, traceability, transparency and reliability. Design/methodology/approach: A pairwise comparison survey of academics and practitioners with expertise in FSCs/BCT was conducted, then application of the Decision-Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory (DEMATEL) technique modelled and quantified the causal links between the barriers. DEMATEL's ability to identify interdependencies and feedback loops provided a detailed understanding of how variables interact in a cause-and-effect network. Findings: Key barriers to the adoption of BCT in FSCs included collaboration, coordination and communication in FSCs, the cost of BCT implementation and BCT customisation costs, all of which were interrelated and affected the availability of tools and standards. Overall, the cost of bespoke design and customisation of BCT systems was perceived as the most influential barrier, while lack of access to legal permissions for cryptocurrency use was considered to have the least impact. Practical implications: Successful BCT adoption depends on addressing implementation costs, enhancing collaboration, coordination and communication in FSCs and developing robust tools and standards that are accepted by all stakeholders. Originality/value: This study explores the adoption of BCT in FSCs using data from two key stakeholder groups: academics and practitioners, demonstrating how coupling rough set theory with DEMATEL reduces subjectivity and creating a robust framework for mapping causal relationships among influencing barriers. Moreover, the work bridges to future research by identifying further areas for research.

Location-sensitive policies are tailored to the specific characteristics and needs of a place, supporting both local priorities and wider national objectives within a particular time frame. They are developed to deliver key strategic outcomes such as energy security, food security or the implementation of national policies at a local scale. Place reflects the perceptions and physical realities of a space and the sense of what it is to be a person living there. The purpose of this conceptual paper is to determine what policy interventions are of influence in accelerating agri-technology adoption in an evolving ‘place’. The example of accelerating agri-technology adoption in Lincolnshire, United Kingdom (UK) is used as an explanatory case. Spatial consciousness, the ordering and management of space, can conflict with spatial connectedness, the socially constructed relationships that shape place, especially at the interface where national development priorities meet local plans. Distinctions between location-sensitive and place-based policies lie in their strategic intent, the intervention processes used, and the meanings then attributed to outcomes by affected communities. Agri-technology adoption can deliver economic and social impact, but place-specific policy interventions are required to deliver just, inclusive and win–win outcomes.

Field-deployable sensors play an important role in precision agriculture and are used to enable key stakeholders (farmers, agronomists, policy makers, etc.) to make informed decisions about resource management and improve crop yields. Sensor developers must consider technological, economic, and human aspects jointly in order to design a successful sensor. The objective of this review is to describe some of the key strands of each aspect and highlight the need to develop a degree of understanding of all of these aspects in order to create technologies that will be easily and readily adopted. Rather than analyzing each area in depth, we limit our discussion to a few major aspects and try to indicate interdependency and showcase their impact on one another. We hope that this approach will instigate thoughts and ideas and stimulate the co-creation of fit-for-purpose sensors.