This narrative review integrates existing studies to show that it is more feasible to understand how parental induction of shame and guilt affects the behavior of adolescents and young adults in different stages in their development. According to the above, this review will introduce the psychological path of self-assessment, responsibility attribution and defense. Also, the culture and society have been shaping the direction of these pathways. Overall, it can be seen that the aggression of adolescents is not caused by negative emotions; rather, it is a defensive coping mechanism resulting from a loss of self-esteem after shame induction by parents, which also leads to a deviation in the sense of responsibility. At the same time, in terms of behavior and adaptation, guilt induction may also be a factor that induces defense mechanisms of children; however, it can also motivate empathy and prosocial behavior out of a need to correct behavior. Finally, this review has established the theoretical boundaries of shame, adaptive guilt and maladaptive guilt; it has put forward an operational framework for family parenting and interventions in school education, and put forward the main directions of future longitudinal studies.

Technological neutrality is when ethical rules do not discriminate among technology and regulate behaviour, outcomes and risks. AI tools such as SRL applications have become more common in legal research, drafting, due diligence, discovery and document management, creating ethical issues like hallucination, bias, lack of explainability and confidentiality, etc. The literature review in this research points to supporting perspectives that focus on current professional responsibilities and the historical context of robotics, as well as conflicting perspectives that raise concerns about AI-related risks. This is a systematic review study based on articles, law cases, ABA advisory opinions and law review articles. Thematic analysis was used to organize the findings into themes to aid in understanding. The results indicate that technological neutrality will future proof legal ethics, maintain the accountability of lawyers, foster innovation, and that the interests of clients can be protected. The discussion suggests that there is a space for AI-specific protection, but not an alternative to neutrality. Finally, the conclusion states that the ethical assessment should not lay at the heart of the technology but at the heart of lawyers' competence, their supervision, and their responsible usage of AI.

In recent years, the digital economy has flourished, giving rise to many new industries and new occupations, which have spawned a large-scale group of new employment forms. Due to its characteristics of "flexible employment" and "cooperative relationship," the field of new employment forms faces prominent problems such as lack of stable social security, high occupational injury risks, and obstructed channels for rights protection appeals, becoming one of the social pain points. This reflects the imbalance in the allocation of public ethical responsibilities among various subjects. This paper systematically analyzes the characteristics of the imbalance in the allocation of public ethical responsibilities among platform enterprises, government departments, and practitioners, and proposes the construction of a tripartite collaborative responsibility community of "platform self-discipline, government regulation, and worker participation" to achieve a balance between platform economic development and the protection of workers' dignity, thereby providing theoretical reference and decision-making basis for the protection of the rights and interests of workers in new employment forms.

International education assistance is becoming a more plural field in which emerging development partners, multilateral organizations, recipient governments, universities, and firms interact. China is increasingly visible in this field, yet its engagement is often interpreted either as distinctive South-South cooperation or as geopolitical influence. This article examines how Chinese policy discourse reframes education assistance, how this perspective is translated into policy instruments, and what governance tensions arise in implementation. Based on qualitative analysis of Chinese and multilateral policy documents issued between 2014 and 2025, supplemented by peer-reviewed research, the study develops a framework of resource transfer, capability formation, and institutional co-production. China's approach combines commitments to mutual benefit, recipient demand, non-conditionality, and autonomous development with infrastructure, scholarships, professional training, vocational education, digital resources, and multilateral trust funds. However, resource asymmetries, fragmented coordination, uneven localization, and limited outcome data constrain the transition from project delivery to locally owned system strengthening. China's contribution therefore lies less in offering a complete alternative aid model than in broadening the repertoire of international education cooperation.

In a parliamentary democracy, government cannot function without both political authority and administrative expertise. Politicians should set direction and take democratic responsibility, while officials should provide professional advice, preserve institutional memory, and have the capacity for implementation. This paper asks what the proper relationship between politicians and officials should be. It addresses this question by qualitatively comparing the Whitehall model in Britain with the Un-Westminster system in Japan. Britain illustrates the principle of a permanent and neutral civil service, which ensures administrative continuity despite changes in ministers. Japan presents a different case, where policy capacity was frequently clustered in ministries and party-bureaucratic networks, making political control and democratic accountability less clear. The comparison also takes into account Blair's reforms in Britain and the DPJ government's efforts to introduce politician-led government in Japan. The main argument is that neither bureaucratic domination nor absolute political command provides a satisfactory relationship. An institutional balance is required for effective government: politicians should lead and be held accountable for results, while officials should have sufficient professional autonomy to advise, warn, and implement.

In recent years, outdoor activities such as hiking, camping, cycling, paddle boarding, frisbee and trail running have gained growing popularity among young people. These activities have gradually shifted from pure leisure to a lifestyle that combines consumption, social interaction and identity expression. From the perspectives of sociology of sport and cultural identity, this paper explores the process of identity construction among young people in outdoor sports consumption. The study points out that the rise of young people's outdoor sports consumption is not only due to the popularization of sports events themselves, but more importantly, it meets the comprehensive needs of urban youth for physical release, interactive experience with nature, social visibility and a sense of belonging in social circles. Identity is mainly generated through physical experience, equipment consumption, spatial check-in and community interaction: physical experience allows young people to re-recognize their own state; equipment consumption carries taste distinction and circle identification; spatial check-in transforms outdoor experience into visible identity; and community interaction promotes individual participation, leading to sustained lifestyle identity. Meanwhile, the younger generation also faces a series of problems in outdoor sports consumption, such as spectacularization, threshold formation and insufficient safety management. In the future, we should start from multiple aspects such as the provision of public space, safety education, guidance of platform content and cultivation of youth communities, to promote outdoor activities from a short-term consumption focus to a safer, more accessible and sustainable lifestyle practice.

With the deepening of urbanization, large-scale rural land expropriation and housing demolition have emerged. Interest competition and underlying conflicts arising from this process have become key research topics in existing scholarship. Taking the land expropriation and demolition process of Village D in City P, Shandong Province as a case, this paper illustrates the strategies adopted by villagers when confronting conflicts with village cadres against the backdrop of grassroots governance prioritizing "zero incidents". The study finds that villagers' strategic behaviors center on "disturbance", combining formal and informal forms of resistance, with organized, violent and non-violent actions coexisting. Such behaviors reflect villagers' expedient adaptation to the prevailing social environment. Nevertheless, in the long run, they exert severe adverse impacts on rural cadre-mass relations and grassroots governance.

The issue of criminal protection for creations generated by generative artificial intelligence lies at the core of four aspects: the determination of the nature of the work, clarification of the ownership of rights, the development of protection paths, and the grasping of the protection limits. Starting from the connotation and extension of originality, artificial intelligence creations have already met the requirements of works in the sense of copyright law; within the framework of current legal interpretation theory, they can be regarded as "works with an unclear authorship", and the owner of the artificial intelligence software can enjoy copyright other than the right of attribution, thereby becoming a qualified subject for the judgment of "without permission" in the crime of infringement of copyright. In terms of protection paths, it should be based on a dual-layer legal interest structure and the purpose of incentive, through the substantive interpretation of the blanket clause and "copying and distribution", "information network dissemination" and other behavioral types, to enable Article 217 to accommodate new criminal phenomena, and to make the liability attribution for developers and users be divided in stages according to the working stages of generative artificial intelligence. At the same time, based on the principle of legal order unity and the requirement of criminal prudence, reasonable limits should be set for criminal protection in terms of protection period, protection content and the threshold for criminalization.

Driven by the rapid development of generative artificial intelligence, commercial chess AI platforms widely crawl grandmasters'tournament game notations without formal authorization, triggering cross-border copyright disputes. Taking unlicensed chess training data conflicts as the research object, this paper adopts comparative law, case analysis and normative interpretation methods to compare copyright rules in China and the United States from four dimensions: originality of competitive game records, the scope of fair use, compensation standards for mass infringement, and centralized licensing mechanisms. Both jurisdictions recognize that serialized move sequences created by grandmasters through independent strategic judgment possess copyright originality. Nevertheless, the two legal systems share four structural defects: commercial text and data mining cannot qualify for statutory fair use; single-work compensation standards fail to address large-scale database infringement; individual one-to-one licensing brings excessive cross-border transaction costs; there are no targeted norms for sports data applied to AI training. To reconcile industrial innovation of chess AI and copyright interests of athletes, this paper proposes a dual-track cross-border governance framework: tiered differentiated compensation rules under national copyright legislation, and a unified global collective licensing platform managed by FIDE. This institutional design realizes equitable benefit distribution between AI developers and chess grandmasters, and can be extended to resolve similar data copyright disputes in all competitive sports industries.

The alienation of artificial intelligence is not a natural product of technology, but a structural upgrade of labor alienation under capital logic in the digital era. Different from the physical discipline in the machine age, artificial intelligence has brought crises in both subjectivity and sociality: through algorithm recommendations, performance scoring, and behavior prediction, it has achieved "mental governance" over cognition, emotion, and even the meaning of existence, shifting alienation from "painful labor" to "unneeded unemployment," constituting a qualitative change from exploitative alienation to existential alienation. Its root does not lie in computing power or data, but in the fact that technology under private ownership serves capital proliferation rather than the all-round development of human beings. Therefore, the fundamental way to dissolve the alienation of artificial intelligence lies in sublating private ownership, so that the means of production serve the common interests of society; at the same time, specific paths such as labor force transformation, supplementary industrial upgrading, legal checks and balances on capital, and global collaboration are needed to make technology return from an alien force dominating people to a collaborative tool liberating people.