The chapter begins with the observation that global history has an ambivalent attitude towards explanation. In many cases, the mere presentation of sources and voices from many different parts of the world seems sufficient to justify a global approach. The need for explanation is ignored or even denied. In other cases, global explanation is eagerly pursued, but often at the expense of more complex explanatory models that incorporate factors at different scales. In this perspective, global explanations are claimed to be inherently superior and a privileged way of explaining historical phenomena. After a cursory survey of current positions on causality and explanation in general methodology and ‘formal’ historical theory, the chapter proposes a brief typology of explanatory strategies. It goes on to discuss the peculiarities of explanation within a framework of connections across great distances and cultural boundaries. The much-exclaimed concept of narrative explanation is found to be of limited value, as it underestimates the difficulties of producing coherent narratives on a global scale. Concepts offered in the social science literature, such as the analysis of mechanisms and temporal sequences, could be helpful in refining purely narrative approaches to explanation.

This chapter tackles two additional activities of the pollster as fortune teller. The first is the assessment and prediction of government approval ratings. As we have already seen in Chapter 8, approval ratings are extremely important in predicting elections. There is both an art and science to the analysis of such measures. Here, we want to lay out an analytical framework which will allow pollsters to assess both structural and policy factors related to approval ratings and then how to utilize multiple methods to triangulate future outcomes. We will focus on the Biden administration circa August 2022. Ultimately, a fairly large component of a pollster’s workload is the continual assessment of government initiatives and their convergence (or not) with what people want.

The second is a discussion of more context-based analysis. The pollster has an important role in helping decision-makers understand the bigger picture. Here, broader demographic and social trends help gird such analysis.

Linguistic pragmatics is one of the fastest growing fields in contemporary theoretical linguistics. It grew from the influential work of philosophers such as Grice, Austin, Stalnaker, Lewis, and others on context and communicative inferences. It engages directly with general rationality, theory of mind, and systems of intention. One of the major debates in pragmatics has been where to precisely draw the line between semantic phenomena and pragmatic phenomena. In this chapter, three classical and influential ideas on the nature of pragmatics, courtesy of Grice (1975), Stalnaker (1978), and Lewis (1979), are discussed. This discussion leads to three further general philosophical frameworks for separating semantic from pragmatic processes and analyses that have roots in the aforementioned triumvirate: (P1) the indexical conception, (P2) the cognitivist conception, and (P3) social-inferential conception. Each option offers a different demarcation. Finally, three linguistic theories of pragmatics are selected as candidate representations of the contemporary state of the art: (L1) optimality-theoretic pragmatics, (L2) game-theoretic pragmatics, and (L3) Bayesian pragmatics. It’s shown that each of these prominent frameworks exploit the philosophical demarcations (P1–P3) presented to different degrees.

Metasemantics is a relatively recent philosophical project. Therefore, there are a number of competing approaches to the investigation of the philosophical nature of the study of meaning. In this chapter, I narrow the focus to the foundations of the scientific study of semantics, not the broader philosophical or metaphysical programme often associated with the philosophy of language. The philosophical foundations project allows for a priori metaphysical considerations to trump naturalistic inquiry. The metascientific project, on the other hand, investigates the formal apparatus, mathematics, and scientific structures of semantics as a science. I argue for the latter interpretation over the former. After establishing the remit of the investigation, the principle of compositionality and the general methodology of formal model-theoretic semantics is explored. Next, the role of context is explained and used as a tool to establish a continuum from formal semantics through dynamic approaches to computational distributional semantics. This is just one lens through which to appreciate often overlooked commonalities between disparate theories. Lastly, formal semantic machinery is extended in a number of directions, from lexical semantics to the burgeoning field of supersemantics. The formal finds complex compositional structure below the word and the latter applies it to phenomena beyond language.

When we think about the health and wellbeing of children, we need a model that is holistic in its conceptualisation and comprehensive in its design, to ensure we gain the best understanding of their health needs and can provide the most effective support. The International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) (WHO, 2001) was developed by the WHO to provide a comprehensive and holistic framework for conceptualising health. WHO first defined health in a holistic way in 1946, regarding it as ‘the state of complete physical, mental and social wellbeing and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity’ (p. 100). WHO recognised a need to develop a framework that would enable professionals, services and governments to enact that definition. The ICF is based on a biopsychosocial framework and aims to integrate the medical and social models of health. In this chapter, we provide an overview of the components of the ICF and describe educational, clinical and research applications of the framework to early years learners.

Chapter four examines the Muses, the sole female divinities who are regularly depicted as musicians in the surviving visual material. The ambiguity inherent to their representation, where it is never clear whether they are goddesses or human women, allows for their bodies to become visual forms capable of taking on multiple identities. Laferrière considers the images within their original contexts, including the domestic sphere, the cemetery, the sanctuary, and the symposium, to examine how the images invited their viewers to imagine the sounds of divine music and what effect this visualized music had upon the viewing audience. In each instance, she argues that the depictions of the Muses respond to the spaces in which they are encountered, so that their visual interpretation becomes inherently multivalent and malleable. When representations of the Muses are considered within a range of possible contexts of use, the vases make a powerful statement about the Muses: not only may they appear in any context or work through any female figure, but as divinities who are flexible in their visual representation, the Muses become visual forms capable of taking on multiple identities.

Health interventions are purposeful activities intended to improve health. They may involve treatment or care of the ill, or health promotion to prevent disease and illness. Complex health interventions have multiple components interacting with each other and with the context of delivery. Evaluation is important to ensure that complex health interventions are effective in achieving their intended outcomes, represent good value for money and cause minimal harm. Evaluation is also important to detect if interventions reduce or increase health inequalities. Intervention effects are not always obvious. They can easily be confused with other changes that occur. Hence, there is a need for evaluation to use rigorous methods to distinguish the ‘signal’ of intervention effects from the ‘noise’ of other effects in the absence of intervention. Evaluation should provide evidence to inform policy. If not based on evidence, there is a risk that policies may not achieve their intended effects or may create harms.

This chapter explores how policymakers and practitioners in settings beyond the sites of evaluation might make use of evidence from realist trials and systematic reviews, plus local needs assessment, to identify the best candidate interventions for their local contexts. To do this, local decision-makers need to assess how likely are interventions to achieve benefits in their contexts. This is partly a matter of assessing whether interventions are likely to be feasible, accessible and acceptable in their settings, which will be influenced by local capacity and norms. It is also a matter of assessing whether intervention mechanisms will be triggered and whether these are likely to generate beneficial outcomes. This will be influenced by what aetiological mechanisms are generating adverse outcomes in the context and hence what vulnerabilities exist which the intervention may be able to address. It will also be influenced by whether the local context provides affordances so that potential beneficiaries may be able to benefit from the intervention. Thinking through these issues should enable local policymakers and practitioners to decide whether such interventions could be delivered immediately at scale, be implementing but only within evaluated pilot studies or be rejected in favour of other interventions.

Theories of change propose how intervention resources and activities might lead to the generation of outcomes. They are sometimes presented diagrammatically as logic models. Realist evaluators and others have suggested that interventions should be theorised in terms of how intervention mechanisms interact with context to generate outcomes. Our own trial of the Learning Together whole-school intervention to prevent bullying set out to define, refine and test such theories in the form of context–mechanism–outcome configurations (CMOCs). We drew on several sources to define our starting CMOCs. These included existing middle range theory. This is scientific theory about the general mechanisms (i.e. not necessarily concerning an intervention) that generate outcomes. This should be analytically general enough to apply to a range of settings, populations and/or outcomes, but specific enough to be useful in a given application. We also used previous research and public consultation to inform our CMOCs.

Chapter 2 introduces identity analysis and uses it to examine whether the Homo economicus conception can identify real-world individuals. It describes the self-referential, circular character of that conception, and shows that the belief that Homo economicus identifies real-world individuals rests on a fallacious inference known as affirming the consequent. The chapter reviews how the identity concept came into economics by making a person’s individual identity their utility function. This is compared with how social identity theory understands individual identity, and economics and social identity’s view of representative agents is then distinguished. Sen’s multiple selves view of individual identity is contrasted with both in light of its ontological basis. Section 4 of the chapter critically evaluates rationality theory’s two independence axioms regarding preferences, the logical basis for saying choice is context-independent and for the unembedded Homo economicus individual conception. It argues neither can be defended and that not only must choice be seen to be context-dependent, but that individuals need to be seen as socially and historically embedded.

This chapter introduces the context and rationale for the book, noting the increased media and policy focus over the last decade, as well as the broader sociopolitical context of the Covid-19 pandemic, post-Brexit, and post-Trump milieux. The case is made for revisiting and challenging the dominant national frame for understanding academic freedom, noting the internationalisation and massification of higher education globally. The outline of the book is situated as addressing this gap and examining three theoretical and interrelated challenges: i) the presumed dichotomy between freedom and diversity/inclusion, ii) the relative lack of attention to the role of academic freedom in knowledge production, and iii) the lack of recognition of the transnational nature of academic freedom.

This chapter serves as a general introduction and overview. It defines the fork in the road and outlines Mozambiques historical context. It goes on to identifying eight key proximate causes and deep factors that determine the basic institutional weaknesses of the country, which are in focus throughout the remainder of the volume.

One of the most complicated issues of present-day linguistics is the relationship of three types of knowledge: linguistic knowledge, conceptual knowledge, and encyclopedic knowledge. After discussing the complexity of their interplay from different perspectives, the chapter presents a model to explain their relationship. The model has linguistic knowledge on one side, and the sociocultural background knowledge (world knowledge) on the other side. There is constant interaction between the two sides in language use. For analytic reasons, within the sociocultural background knowledge there a distinction is made between conceptual knowledge and encyclopedic knowledge. According to this model, meaning is constructed in the dynamic interplay of actual situational context and lexical items, with the context representing the actual, present, situational, ever-changing side of sociocultural background and the lexical item(s) embodying previous experiences and relations in the sociocultural background. The lexical items with their semantic properties (linguistic knowledge) represent prior reoccurring experience (conceptual knowledge), and the actual situational context triggers the other part of world knowledge that we previously called encyclopedic knowledge. The difference between the two types of sociocultural background knowledge is that the conceptual knowledge part is immediately tied to linguistic knowledge while the other type of sociocultural background knowledge (encyclopedic knowledge) is called upon as needed in language use.

This chapter presents a view on context as understood within functional models of language, specifically the theoretical framework of Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL). Amongst the functional approaches to language, SFL is recognized as a framework which has maintained an account of context that has prioritized its relationship with lexicogrammar, allowing it to make a causal connection between culture and language. The aim of this chapter is to highlight and explain the principal ways in which context works within the SFL framework and explore the main themes and parameters which situate context within an integrated theory of language as a semiotic resource. As no theory emerges in a vacuum, the first part of the chapter will consider the historical development of context as a concept within SFL theory with reference to how context is situated in other related functional grammars. Following this, we examine two areas of challenge related to the approach to context outlined in the chapter. Finally, the chapter concludes with closing remarks and key directions for future research in this area.

This chapter focuses on the interplay of health policy and politics at a national level, and:

• explores the process by which health policy is created and the context in which it is developed and influenced;

• considers the interplay between policy and its implementation; and

• offers a narrative of the evolution of national health policy and politics in England over the last 30 years.

As we discussed with regard to leadership in Part 1, the context in which the public health tools are used has a bearing on the choice of tool and how it is implemented. In the second part of Essential Public Health: Theory and Practice, we consider a range of contemporary contexts in which public health is practised and illustrate how the tools we have described are applied.

Within a cyberpragmatic framework rooted in cognitive pragmatics (Yus 2011), context is basically information that is brought to bear in turning the schematic coded input (e.g., spoken, written, or typed words) into interpretations. Although it is undeniable that contextual information may stem from different sources, eventually what is at stake in contextualization is to mentally assess and select the appropriate quality and quantity of information that allows us to reach meaningful interpretations. Regarding the specificity of social media and internet communication overall, several challenges for pragmatic analysis arise, some of which will be addressed in this chapter. Specifically, what interests most in an analysis of context online are: (a) the role of the interfaces in favoring/limiting the contextualization of utterances; (b) the role of the physical-virtual interface in today’s internet-mediated communication; and specially (c) the differentiation of the user’s personal, interactive, and social contexts managed in everyday virtual communication.

Part III draws together the central threads in the preceding chapters and takes the analysis a step further. Chapter 8 draws particular attention to the importance of context in ECtHR jurisprudence relating to ECHR Article 9, contending that in taking different approaches and reaching different outcomes in ostensibly similar Article 9 cases, the ECtHR is not necessarily being inconsistent. Rather, its approach can be explained by recognising the significance of the facts; the facts help the ECtHR identify what is at stake in a particular case and respond accordingly. In developing this, this chapter explores the importance placed on contextual differences between, and within, Member States by the ECtHR in Article 9 cases, and refers to the major role of the facts in cases concerning other ECHR Articles. Finally, it explores some of the broader cultural, social and political factors the ECtHR may legitimately take into account in Article 9 assessments, and considers the impact of the increased focus on the local context in declarations on reform of the ECHR system on the ECtHR.