![]() Version 21.2 Database Schema Revision History (Database Version 139) Schema Preferences: - Update Db Version Date to: 2013.11.11 - Update Db Version number to: 139 Schema changes SYSTEM: - Increase afm_flds.dflt_val size to VARCHAR(128) also in afm_flds_trans ( 3042049 ) UPDATE afm_flds SET afm_size=128, data_type=12 WHERE table_name IN ('afm_flds', 'afm_flds_trans') AND field_name='dflt_val' ALTER TABLE afm_flds MODIFY dflt_val VARCHAR(128) DEFAULT NULL ALTER TABLE afm_flds_trans MODIFY dflt_val VARCHAR(128) DEFAULT NULL - Update the Process Type enum display value for "PAGES" to be more descriptive for navigation pages( 3041703 ) UPDATE afm_flds SET enum_list='WEB Web PNav WEB-DASH Web Dashboard WEB-PAGENAV Web Page Navigator SC Smart Client SCOVERLAY Smart Client Extension WINDOWS Client/Server OVERLAY Client/Server Overlay PAGES Nav Page Processes WEB&PAGES Web Pnav & Pages'where table_name='afm_processes' and field_name='process_type' - Update the Process Type enum display value for "PAGES" to be more descriptive for navigation pages. View your ARCHIBUS Database version by checking the ARCHIBUS Schema Preferences Since database schema versions can run with different releases of theĪRCHIBUS program, databases are tagged with an "ARCHIBUS Database You need to include only the BOMA 96 enumeration changes if you need the You can review this information if you need some newĭatabase object on which a new desired feature depends. New versions of ARCHIBUS are backward-compatible with previous schemaįormats. Using the standard ARCHIBUS schema do not need this information.Įven sites with custom schema might not need this information. So they can see if they need to migrate any changes from the released Information is provided for the benefit of users with customized schemas This topic contains the list of changes to the database schema file Social, Health, and Organizational Psychology, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands.Database Schema Revision History Database Schema Revision History. ![]() ![]() The TOTE-model (Test-Operate-Test-Exit) of self-regulation will serve as a basis for this definition as it gives clear guidance for the inclusion of self-control as a component of, but not synonymous to self-regulation.Īs such, consensus on defining self-control is critical for advancing both scientific progress as well as societal impact of research findings. Ultimately, an ‘operational’ definition is proposed in which self-regulation entails scaffolding for goal pursuit, including setting standards, and monitoring discrepancies, whereas self-control entails everything that one does in the ‘operate’ phase. This perspective allows for inclusion of traditional as well as contemporary research on self-control, and can provide direction for future studies. Self-control is a hot topic across disciplines. Scholars from social, health, and personality psychology, as well as from developmental and brain sciences, to name a few areas, devote their work to understanding the causes, consequences, and underpinnings of this key human trait. As such, consensus on what we mean when we use the term self-control is critical. Without such consensus, synthesizing research on self-control is precluded, hindering both scientific progress as well as societal impact of research findings. However, recent developments in self-control research seem to have muddled the definition waters, causing some confusion about what self-control entails, and what it does not. ![]() Specifically, the emergence of initiation as a self-control component, and the notion of effortless and strategic self-control, give rise to the question whether and how to distinguish self-control from self-regulation. In this paper, I propose an operational definition of self-control, based on converging definitions from the literature as well as on the emergence of new perspectives on self-control.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |