Assessing the Impact of Social Culture and National Regulations on Women’s Engagement in Logistics Decision-Making in Uganda

Assessing the Impact of Social Culture and National... | F1000Research "use strict";function _typeof(t){return(_typeof="function"==typeof Symbol&&"symbol"==typeof Symbol.iterator?function(t){return typeof t}:function(t){return t&&"function"==typeof Symbol&&t.constructor===Symbol&&t!==Symbol.prototype?"symbol":typeof t})(t)}!function(){var t=function(){var t,e,o=[],n=window,r=n;for(;r;){try{if(r.frames.__tcfapiLocator){t=r;break}}catch(t){}if(r===n.top)break;r=r.parent}t||(!function t(){var e=n.document,o=!!n.frames.__tcfapiLocator;if(!o)if(e.body){var r=e.createElement("iframe");r.style.cssText="display:none",r.name="__tcfapiLocator",e.body.appendChild(r)}else setTimeout(t,5);return!o}(),n.__tcfapi=function(){for(var t=arguments.length,n=new Array(t),r=0;r 3&&2===parseInt(n[1],10)&&"boolean"==typeof n[3]&&(e=n[3],"function"==typeof n[2]&&n[2]("set",!0)):"ping"===n[0]?"function"==typeof n[2]&&n[2]({gdprApplies:e,cmpLoaded:!1,cmpStatus:"stub"}):o.push(n)},n.addEventListener("message",(function(t){var e="string"==typeof t.data,o={};if(e)try{o=JSON.parse(t.data)}catch(t){}else o=t.data;var n="object"===_typeof(o)&&null!==o?o.__tcfapiCall:null;n&&window.__tcfapi(n.command,n.version,(function(o,r){var a={__tcfapiReturn:{returnValue:o,success:r,callId:n.callId}};t&&t.source&&t.source.postMessage&&t.source.postMessage(e?JSON.stringify(a):a,"*")}),n.parameter)}),!1))};"undefined"!=typeof module?module.exports=t:t()}(); dataLayer = dataLayer || []; // Standard GTM initialization - Google Consent Mode handles consent automatically (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start': new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0], j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src= 'https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl+ '>m_auth=hzk0Vc3qFsQYhCrIoHz68A>m_preview=env-1>m_cookies_win=x';f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f); })(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-MWFK8L5J'); ;window.NREUM||(NREUM={});NREUM.init={distributed_tracing:{enabled:true},privacy:{cookies_enabled:true},ajax:{deny_list:["bam.nr-data.net"]}}; ;NREUM.loader_config={accountID:"438030",trustKey:"438030",agentID:"772317073",licenseKey:"97f8f67f26",applicationID:"772317073"} ;NREUM.info={beacon:"bam.nr-data.net",errorBeacon:"bam.nr-data.net",licenseKey:"97f8f67f26",applicationID:"772317073",sa:1} ;/*! For license information please see nr-loader-spa-1.236.0.min.js.LICENSE.txt */ (()=>{"use strict";var e,t,r={5763:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{P_:()=>l,Mt:()=>g,C5:()=>s,DL:()=>v,OP:()=>T,lF:()=>D,Yu:()=>y,Dg:()=>h,CX:()=>c,GE:()=>b,sU:()=>_});var n=r(8632),i=r(9567);const o={beacon:n.ce.beacon,errorBeacon:n.ce.errorBeacon,licenseKey:void 0,applicationID:void 0,sa:void 0,queueTime:void 0,applicationTime:void 0,ttGuid:void 0,user:void 0,account:void 0,product:void 0,extra:void 0,jsAttributes:{},userAttributes:void 0,atts:void 0,transactionName:void 0,tNamePlain:void 0},a={};function s(e){if(!e)throw new Error("All info objects require an agent identifier!");if(!a[e])throw new Error("Info for ".concat(e," was never set"));return a[e]}function c(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error("All info objects require an agent identifier!");a[e]=(0,i.D)(t,o),(0,n.Qy)(e,a[e],"info")}var u=r(7056);const d=()=>{const e={blockSelector:"[data-nr-block]",maskInputOptions:{password:!0}};return{allow_bfcache:!0,privacy:{cookies_enabled:!0},ajax:{deny_list:void 0,enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10},distributed_tracing:{enabled:void 0,exclude_newrelic_header:void 0,cors_use_newrelic_header:void 0,cors_use_tracecontext_headers:void 0,allowed_origins:void 0},session:{domain:void 0,expiresMs:u.oD,inactiveMs:u.Hb},ssl:void 0,obfuscate:void 0,jserrors:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10},metrics:{enabled:!0},page_action:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:30},page_view_event:{enabled:!0},page_view_timing:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:30,long_task:!1},session_trace:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10},harvest:{tooManyRequestsDelay:60},session_replay:{enabled:!1,harvestTimeSeconds:60,sampleRate:.1,errorSampleRate:.1,maskTextSelector:"*",maskAllInputs:!0,get blockClass(){return"nr-block"},get ignoreClass(){return"nr-ignore"},get maskTextClass(){return"nr-mask"},get blockSelector(){return e.blockSelector},set blockSelector(t){e.blockSelector+=",".concat(t)},get maskInputOptions(){return e.maskInputOptions},set maskInputOptions(t){e.maskInputOptions={...t,password:!0}}},spa:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10}}},f={};function l(e){if(!e)throw new Error("All configuration objects require an agent identifier!");if(!f[e])throw new Error("Configuration for ".concat(e," was never set"));return f[e]}function h(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error("All configuration objects require an agent identifier!");f[e]=(0,i.D)(t,d()),(0,n.Qy)(e,f[e],"config")}function g(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error("All configuration objects require an agent identifier!");var r=l(e);if(r){for(var n=t.split("."),i=0;i {r.d(t,{D:()=>i});var n=r(50);function i(e,t){try{if(!e||"object"!=typeof e)return(0,n.Z)("Setting a Configurable requires an object as input");if(!t||"object"!=typeof t)return(0,n.Z)("Setting a Configurable requires a model to set its initial properties");const r=Object.create(Object.getPrototypeOf(t),Object.getOwnPropertyDescriptors(t)),o=0===Object.keys(r).length?e:r;for(let a in o)if(void 0!==e[a])try{"object"==typeof e[a]&&"object"==typeof t[a]?r[a]=i(e[a],t[a]):r[a]=e[a]}catch(e){(0,n.Z)("An error occurred while setting a property of a Configurable",e)}return r}catch(e){(0,n.Z)("An error occured while setting a Configurable",e)}}},6818:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{Re:()=>i,gF:()=>o,q4:()=>n});const n="1.236.0",i="PROD",o="CDN"},385:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{FN:()=>a,IF:()=>u,Nk:()=>f,Tt:()=>s,_A:()=>o,il:()=>n,pL:()=>c,v6:()=>i,w1:()=>d});const n="undefined"!=typeof window&&!!window.document,i="undefined"!=typeof WorkerGlobalScope&&("undefined"!=typeof self&&self instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&self.navigator instanceof WorkerNavigator||"undefined"!=typeof globalThis&&globalThis instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&globalThis.navigator instanceof WorkerNavigator),o=n?window:"undefined"!=typeof WorkerGlobalScope&&("undefined"!=typeof self&&self instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&self||"undefined"!=typeof globalThis&&globalThis instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&globalThis),a=""+o?.location,s=/iPad|iPhone|iPod/.test(navigator.userAgent),c=s&&"undefined"==typeof SharedWorker,u=(()=>{const e=navigator.userAgent.match(/Firefox[/\s](\d+\.\d+)/);return Array.isArray(e)&&e.length>=2?+e[1]:0})(),d=Boolean(n&&window.document.documentMode),f=!!navigator.sendBeacon},1117:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{w:()=>o});var n=r(50);const i={agentIdentifier:"",ee:void 0};class o{constructor(e){try{if("object"!=typeof e)return(0,n.Z)("shared context requires an object as input");this.sharedContext={},Object.assign(this.sharedContext,i),Object.entries(e).forEach((e=>{let[t,r]=e;Object.keys(i).includes(t)&&(this.sharedContext[t]=r)}))}catch(e){(0,n.Z)("An error occured while setting SharedContext",e)}}}},8e3:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{L:()=>d,R:()=>c});var n=r(2177),i=r(1284),o=r(4322),a=r(3325);const s={};function c(e,t){const r={staged:!1,priority:a.p[t]||0};u(e),s[e].get(t)||s[e].set(t,r)}function u(e){e&&(s[e]||(s[e]=new Map))}function d(){let e=arguments.length>0&&void 0!==arguments[0]?arguments[0]:"",t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]?arguments[1]:"feature";if(u(e),!e||!s[e].get(t))return a(t);s[e].get(t).staged=!0;const r=[...s[e]];function a(t){const r=e?n.ee.get(e):n.ee,a=o.X.handlers;if(r.backlog&&a){var s=r.backlog[t],c=a[t];if(c){for(var u=0;s&&u {let[t,r]=e;return r.staged}))&&(r.sort(((e,t)=>e[1].priority-t[1].priority)),r.forEach((e=>{let[t]=e;a(t)})))}function f(e,t){var r=e[1];(0,i.D)(t[r],(function(t,r){var n=e[0];if(r[0]===n){var i=r[1],o=e[3],a=e[2];i.apply(o,a)}}))}},2177:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{c:()=>f,ee:()=>u});var n=r(8632),i=r(2210),o=r(1284),a=r(5763),s="nr@context";let c=(0,n.fP)();var u;function d(){}function f(e){return(0,i.X)(e,s,l)}function l(){return new d}function h(){u.aborted=!0,u.backlog={}}c.ee?u=c.ee:(u=function e(t,r){var n={},c={},f={},g=!1;try{g=16===r.length&&(0,a.OP)(r).isolatedBacklog}catch(e){}var p={on:b,addEventListener:b,removeEventListener:y,emit:v,get:x,listeners:w,context:m,buffer:A,abort:h,aborted:!1,isBuffering:E,debugId:r,backlog:g?{}:t&&"object"==typeof t.backlog?t.backlog:{}};return p;function m(e){return e&&e instanceof d?e:e?(0,i.X)(e,s,l):l()}function v(e,r,n,i,o){if(!1!==o&&(o=!0),!u.aborted||i){t&&o&&t.emit(e,r,n);for(var a=m(n),s=w(e),d=s.length,f=0;fn,p:()=>i});var n=r(2177).ee.get("handle");function i(e,t,r,i,o){o?(o.buffer([e],i),o.emit(e,t,r)):(n.buffer([e],i),n.emit(e,t,r))}},4322:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{X:()=>o});var n=r(5546);o.on=a;var i=o.handlers={};function o(e,t,r,o){a(o||n.E,i,e,t,r)}function a(e,t,r,i,o){o||(o="feature"),e||(e=n.E);var a=t[o]=t[o]||{};(a[r]=a[r]||[]).push([e,i])}},3239:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{bP:()=>s,iz:()=>c,m$:()=>a});var n=r(385);let i=!1,o=!1;try{const e={get passive(){return i=!0,!1},get signal(){return o=!0,!1}};n._A.addEventListener("test",null,e),n._A.removeEventListener("test",null,e)}catch(e){}function a(e,t){return i||o?{capture:!!e,passive:i,signal:t}:!!e}function s(e,t){let r=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2],n=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0;window.addEventListener(e,t,a(r,n))}function c(e,t){let r=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2],n=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0;document.addEventListener(e,t,a(r,n))}},4402:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{Ht:()=>u,M:()=>c,Rl:()=>a,ky:()=>s});var n=r(385);const i="xxxxxxxx-xxxx-4xxx-yxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxx";function o(e,t){return e?15&e[t]:16*Math.random()|0}function a(){const e=n._A?.crypto||n._A?.msCrypto;let t,r=0;return e&&e.getRandomValues&&(t=e.getRandomValues(new Uint8Array(31))),i.split("").map((e=>"x"===e?o(t,++r).toString(16):"y"===e?(3&o()|8).toString(16):e)).join("")}function s(e){const t=n._A?.crypto||n._A?.msCrypto;let r,i=0;t&&t.getRandomValues&&(r=t.getRandomValues(new Uint8Array(31)));const a=[];for(var s=0;s {r.d(t,{Bq:()=>n,Hb:()=>o,oD:()=>i});const n="NRBA",i=144e5,o=18e5},7894:(e,t,r)=>{function n(){return Math.round(performance.now())}r.d(t,{z:()=>n})},7243:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{e:()=>o});var n=r(385),i={};function o(e){if(e in i)return i[e];if(0===(e||"").indexOf("data:"))return{protocol:"data"};let t;var r=n._A?.location,o={};if(n.il)t=document.createElement("a"),t.href=e;else try{t=new URL(e,r.href)}catch(e){return o}o.port=t.port;var a=t.href.split("://");!o.port&&a[1]&&(o.port=a[1].split("/")[0].split("@").pop().split(":")[1]),o.port&&"0"!==o.port||(o.port="https"===a[0]?"443":"80"),o.hostname=t.hostname||r.hostname,o.pathname=t.pathname,o.protocol=a[0],"/"!==o.pathname.charAt(0)&&(o.pathname="/"+o.pathname);var s=!t.protocol||":"===t.protocol||t.protocol===r.protocol,c=t.hostname===r.hostname&&t.port===r.port;return o.sameOrigin=s&&(!t.hostname||c),"/"===o.pathname&&(i[e]=o),o}},50:(e,t,r)=>{function n(e,t){"function"==typeof console.warn&&(console.warn("New Relic: ".concat(e)),t&&console.warn(t))}r.d(t,{Z:()=>n})},2587:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{N:()=>c,T:()=>u});var n=r(2177),i=r(5546),o=r(8e3),a=r(3325);const s={stn:[a.D.sessionTrace],err:[a.D.jserrors,a.D.metrics],ins:[a.D.pageAction],spa:[a.D.spa],sr:[a.D.sessionReplay,a.D.sessionTrace]};function c(e,t){const r=n.ee.get(t);e&&"object"==typeof e&&(Object.entries(e).forEach((e=>{let[t,n]=e;void 0===u[t]&&(s[t]?s[t].forEach((e=>{n?(0,i.p)("feat-"+t,[],void 0,e,r):(0,i.p)("block-"+t,[],void 0,e,r),(0,i.p)("rumresp-"+t,[Boolean(n)],void 0,e,r)})):n&&(0,i.p)("feat-"+t,[],void 0,void 0,r),u[t]=Boolean(n))})),Object.keys(s).forEach((e=>{void 0===u[e]&&(s[e]?.forEach((t=>(0,i.p)("rumresp-"+e,[!1],void 0,t,r))),u[e]=!1)})),(0,o.L)(t,a.D.pageViewEvent))}const u={}},2210:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{X:()=>i});var n=Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty;function i(e,t,r){if(n.call(e,t))return e[t];var i=r();if(Object.defineProperty&&Object.keys)try{return Object.defineProperty(e,t,{value:i,writable:!0,enumerable:!1}),i}catch(e){}return e[t]=i,i}},1284:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{D:()=>n});const n=(e,t)=>Object.entries(e||{}).map((e=>{let[r,n]=e;return t(r,n)}))},4351:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{P:()=>o});var n=r(2177);const i=()=>{const e=new WeakSet;return(t,r)=>{if("object"==typeof r&&null!==r){if(e.has(r))return;e.add(r)}return r}};function o(e){try{return JSON.stringify(e,i())}catch(e){try{n.ee.emit("internal-error",[e])}catch(e){}}}},3960:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{K:()=>a,b:()=>o});var n=r(3239);function i(){return"undefined"==typeof document||"complete"===document.readyState}function o(e,t){if(i())return e();(0,n.bP)("load",e,t)}function a(e){if(i())return e();(0,n.iz)("DOMContentLoaded",e)}},8632:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{EZ:()=>u,Qy:()=>c,ce:()=>o,fP:()=>a,gG:()=>d,mF:()=>s});var n=r(7894),i=r(385);const o={beacon:"bam.nr-data.net",errorBeacon:"bam.nr-data.net"};function a(){return i._A.NREUM||(i._A.NREUM={}),void 0===i._A.newrelic&&(i._A.newrelic=i._A.NREUM),i._A.NREUM}function s(){let e=a();return e.o||(e.o={ST:i._A.setTimeout,SI:i._A.setImmediate,CT:i._A.clearTimeout,XHR:i._A.XMLHttpRequest,REQ:i._A.Request,EV:i._A.Event,PR:i._A.Promise,MO:i._A.MutationObserver,FETCH:i._A.fetch}),e}function c(e,t,r){let i=a();const o=i.initializedAgents||{},s=o[e]||{};return Object.keys(s).length||(s.initializedAt={ms:(0,n.z)(),date:new Date}),i.initializedAgents={...o,[e]:{...s,[r]:t}},i}function u(e,t){a()[e]=t}function d(){return function(){let e=a();const t=e.info||{};e.info={beacon:o.beacon,errorBeacon:o.errorBeacon,...t}}(),function(){let e=a();const t=e.init||{};e.init={...t}}(),s(),function(){let e=a();const t=e.loader_config||{};e.loader_config={...t}}(),a()}},7956:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{N:()=>i});var n=r(3239);function i(e){let t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]&&arguments[1],r=arguments.length>2?arguments[2]:void 0,i=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0;return void(0,n.iz)("visibilitychange",(function(){if(t)return void("hidden"==document.visibilityState&&e());e(document.visibilityState)}),r,i)}},1214:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{em:()=>v,u5:()=>N,QU:()=>S,_L:()=>I,Gm:()=>L,Lg:()=>M,gy:()=>U,BV:()=>Q,Kf:()=>ee});var n=r(2177);const i="nr@original";var o=Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty,a=!1;function s(e,t){return e||(e=n.ee),r.inPlace=function(e,t,n,i,o){n||(n="");var a,s,c,u="-"===n.charAt(0);for(c=0;c 2?n-2:0),o=2;o {r(A[T],e,w),r(E[T],e,w)})),r(l._A,"fetch",y),t.on(y+"end",(function(e,r){var n=this;if(r){var i=r.headers.get("content-length");null!==i&&(n.rxSize=i),t.emit(y+"done",[null,r],n)}else t.emit(y+"done",[e],n)})),t}const O={},j=["pushState","replaceState"];function S(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("history")}(e);return!l.il||O[t.debugId]++||(O[t.debugId]=1,s(t).inPlace(window.history,j,"-")),t}var P=r(3239);const C={},R=["appendChild","insertBefore","replaceChild"];function I(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("jsonp")}(e);if(!l.il||C[t.debugId])return t;C[t.debugId]=!0;var r=s(t),i=/[?&](?:callback|cb)=([^&#]+)/,o=/(.*)\.([^.]+)/,a=/^(\w+)(\.|$)(.*)$/;function c(e,t){var r=e.match(a),n=r[1],i=r[3];return i?c(i,t[n]):t[n]}return r.inPlace(Node.prototype,R,"dom-"),t.on("dom-start",(function(e){!function(e){if(!e||"string"!=typeof e.nodeName||"script"!==e.nodeName.toLowerCase())return;if("function"!=typeof e.addEventListener)return;var n=(a=e.src,s=a.match(i),s?s[1]:null);var a,s;if(!n)return;var u=function(e){var t=e.match(o);if(t&&t.length>=3)return{key:t[2],parent:c(t[1],window)};return{key:e,parent:window}}(n);if("function"!=typeof u.parent[u.key])return;var d={};function f(){t.emit("jsonp-end",[],d),e.removeEventListener("load",f,(0,P.m$)(!1)),e.removeEventListener("error",l,(0,P.m$)(!1))}function l(){t.emit("jsonp-error",[],d),t.emit("jsonp-end",[],d),e.removeEventListener("load",f,(0,P.m$)(!1)),e.removeEventListener("error",l,(0,P.m$)(!1))}r.inPlace(u.parent,[u.key],"cb-",d),e.addEventListener("load",f,(0,P.m$)(!1)),e.addEventListener("error",l,(0,P.m$)(!1)),t.emit("new-jsonp",[e.src],d)}(e[0])})),t}var k=r(5763);const H={};function L(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("mutation")}(e);if(!l.il||H[t.debugId])return t;H[t.debugId]=!0;var r=s(t),i=k.Yu.MO;return i&&(window.MutationObserver=function(e){return this instanceof i?new i(r(e,"fn-")):i.apply(this,arguments)},MutationObserver.prototype=i.prototype),t}const z={};function M(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("promise")}(e);if(z[t.debugId])return t;z[t.debugId]=!0;var r=n.c,o=s(t),a=k.Yu.PR;return a&&function(){function e(r){var n=t.context(),i=o(r,"executor-",n,null,!1);const s=Reflect.construct(a,[i],e);return t.context(s).getCtx=function(){return n},s}l._A.Promise=e,Object.defineProperty(e,"name",{value:"Promise"}),e.toString=function(){return a.toString()},Object.setPrototypeOf(e,a),["all","race"].forEach((function(r){const n=a[r];e[r]=function(e){let i=!1;[...e||[]].forEach((e=>{this.resolve(e).then(a("all"===r),a(!1))}));const o=n.apply(this,arguments);return o;function a(e){return function(){t.emit("propagate",[null,!i],o,!1,!1),i=i||!e}}}})),["resolve","reject"].forEach((function(r){const n=a[r];e[r]=function(e){const r=n.apply(this,arguments);return e!==r&&t.emit("propagate",[e,!0],r,!1,!1),r}})),e.prototype=a.prototype;const n=a.prototype.then;a.prototype.then=function(){var e=this,i=r(e);i.promise=e;for(var a=arguments.length,s=new Array(a),c=0;c e())),t};function m(e,t){i.inPlace(t,["onreadystatechange"],"fn-",E)}function b(){var e=this,t=r.context(e);e.readyState>3&&!t.resolved&&(t.resolved=!0,r.emit("xhr-resolved",[],e)),i.inPlace(e,f,"fn-",E)}if(function(e,t){for(var r in e)t[r]=e[r]}(o,p),p.prototype=o.prototype,i.inPlace(p.prototype,J,"-xhr-",E),r.on("send-xhr-start",(function(e,t){m(e,t),function(e){h.push(e),a&&(y?y.then(A):u?u(A):(w=-w,x.data=w))}(t)})),r.on("open-xhr-start",m),a){var y=c&&c.resolve();if(!u&&!c){var w=1,x=document.createTextNode(w);new a(A).observe(x,{characterData:!0})}}else t.on("fn-end",(function(e){e[0]&&e[0].type===d||A()}));function A(){for(var e=0;e {r.d(t,{t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.ajax},6660:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{A:()=>i,t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.jserrors,i="nr@seenError"},3081:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{gF:()=>o,mY:()=>i,t9:()=>n,vz:()=>s,xS:()=>a});const n=r(3325).D.metrics,i="sm",o="cm",a="storeSupportabilityMetrics",s="storeEventMetrics"},4649:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.pageAction},7633:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{Dz:()=>i,OJ:()=>a,qw:()=>o,t9:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.pageViewEvent,i="firstbyte",o="domcontent",a="windowload"},9251:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.pageViewTiming},3614:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{BST_RESOURCE:()=>i,END:()=>s,FEATURE_NAME:()=>n,FN_END:()=>u,FN_START:()=>c,PUSH_STATE:()=>d,RESOURCE:()=>o,START:()=>a});const n=r(3325).D.sessionTrace,i="bstResource",o="resource",a="-start",s="-end",c="fn"+a,u="fn"+s,d="pushState"},7836:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{BODY:()=>A,CB_END:()=>E,CB_START:()=>u,END:()=>x,FEATURE_NAME:()=>i,FETCH:()=>_,FETCH_BODY:()=>v,FETCH_DONE:()=>m,FETCH_START:()=>p,FN_END:()=>c,FN_START:()=>s,INTERACTION:()=>l,INTERACTION_API:()=>d,INTERACTION_EVENTS:()=>o,JSONP_END:()=>b,JSONP_NODE:()=>g,JS_TIME:()=>T,MAX_TIMER_BUDGET:()=>a,REMAINING:()=>f,SPA_NODE:()=>h,START:()=>w,originalSetTimeout:()=>y});var n=r(5763);const i=r(3325).D.spa,o=["click","submit","keypress","keydown","keyup","change"],a=999,s="fn-start",c="fn-end",u="cb-start",d="api-ixn-",f="remaining",l="interaction",h="spaNode",g="jsonpNode",p="fetch-start",m="fetch-done",v="fetch-body-",b="jsonp-end",y=n.Yu.ST,w="-start",x="-end",A="-body",E="cb"+x,T="jsTime",_="fetch"},5938:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{W:()=>o});var n=r(5763),i=r(2177);class o{constructor(e,t,r){this.agentIdentifier=e,this.aggregator=t,this.ee=i.ee.get(e,(0,n.OP)(this.agentIdentifier).isolatedBacklog),this.featureName=r,this.blocked=!1}}},9144:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{j:()=>m});var n=r(3325),i=r(5763),o=r(5546),a=r(2177),s=r(7894),c=r(8e3),u=r(3960),d=r(385),f=r(50),l=r(3081),h=r(8632);function g(){const e=(0,h.gG)();["setErrorHandler","finished","addToTrace","inlineHit","addRelease","addPageAction","setCurrentRouteName","setPageViewName","setCustomAttribute","interaction","noticeError","setUserId"].forEach((t=>{e[t]=function(){for(var r=arguments.length,n=new Array(r),i=0;i 1?r-1:0),i=1;i {e.exposed&&e.api[t]&&o.push(e.api[t](...n))})),o.length>1?o:o[0]}(t,...n)}}))}var p=r(2587);function m(e){let t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]?arguments[1]:{},m=arguments.length>2?arguments[2]:void 0,v=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0,{init:b,info:y,loader_config:w,runtime:x={loaderType:m},exposed:A=!0}=t;const E=(0,h.gG)();y||(b=E.init,y=E.info,w=E.loader_config),(0,i.Dg)(e,b||{}),(0,i.GE)(e,w||{}),(0,i.sU)(e,x),y.jsAttributes??={},d.v6&&(y.jsAttributes.isWorker=!0),(0,i.CX)(e,y),g();const T=function(e,t){t||(0,c.R)(e,"api");const h={};var g=a.ee.get(e),p=g.get("tracer"),m="api-",v=m+"ixn-";function b(t,r,n,o){const a=(0,i.C5)(e);return null===r?delete a.jsAttributes[t]:(0,i.CX)(e,{...a,jsAttributes:{...a.jsAttributes,[t]:r}}),x(m,n,!0,o||null===r?"session":void 0)(t,r)}function y(){}["setErrorHandler","finished","addToTrace","inlineHit","addRelease"].forEach((e=>h[e]=x(m,e,!0,"api"))),h.addPageAction=x(m,"addPageAction",!0,n.D.pageAction),h.setCurrentRouteName=x(m,"routeName",!0,n.D.spa),h.setPageViewName=function(t,r){if("string"==typeof t)return"/"!==t.charAt(0)&&(t="/"+t),(0,i.OP)(e).customTransaction=(r||"http://custom.transaction")+t,x(m,"setPageViewName",!0)()},h.setCustomAttribute=function(e,t){let r=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2];if("string"==typeof e){if(["string","number"].includes(typeof t)||null===t)return b(e,t,"setCustomAttribute",r);(0,f.Z)("Failed to execute setCustomAttribute.\nNon-null value must be a string or number type, but a type of was provided."))}else(0,f.Z)("Failed to execute setCustomAttribute.\nName must be a string type, but a type of was provided."))},h.setUserId=function(e){if("string"==typeof e||null===e)return b("enduser.id",e,"setUserId",!0);(0,f.Z)("Failed to execute setUserId.\nNon-null value must be a string type, but a type of was provided."))},h.interaction=function(){return(new y).get()};var w=y.prototype={createTracer:function(e,t){var r={},i=this,a="function"==typeof t;return(0,o.p)(v+"tracer",[(0,s.z)(),e,r],i,n.D.spa,g),function(){if(p.emit((a?"":"no-")+"fn-start",[(0,s.z)(),i,a],r),a)try{return t.apply(this,arguments)}catch(e){throw p.emit("fn-err",[arguments,this,"string"==typeof e?new Error(e):e],r),e}finally{p.emit("fn-end",[(0,s.z)()],r)}}}};function x(e,t,r,i){return function(){return(0,o.p)(l.xS,["API/"+t+"/called"],void 0,n.D.metrics,g),i&&(0,o.p)(e+t,[(0,s.z)(),...arguments],r?null:this,i,g),r?void 0:this}}function A(){r.e(439).then(r.bind(r,7438)).then((t=>{let{setAPI:r}=t;r(e),(0,c.L)(e,"api")})).catch((()=>(0,f.Z)("Downloading runtime APIs failed...")))}return["actionText","setName","setAttribute","save","ignore","onEnd","getContext","end","get"].forEach((e=>{w[e]=x(v,e,void 0,n.D.spa)})),h.noticeError=function(e,t){"string"==typeof e&&(e=new Error(e)),(0,o.p)(l.xS,["API/noticeError/called"],void 0,n.D.metrics,g),(0,o.p)("err",[e,(0,s.z)(),!1,t],void 0,n.D.jserrors,g)},d.il?(0,u.b)((()=>A()),!0):A(),h}(e,v);return(0,h.Qy)(e,T,"api"),(0,h.Qy)(e,A,"exposed"),(0,h.EZ)("activatedFeatures",p.T),T}},3325:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{D:()=>n,p:()=>i});const n={ajax:"ajax",jserrors:"jserrors",metrics:"metrics",pageAction:"page_action",pageViewEvent:"page_view_event",pageViewTiming:"page_view_timing",sessionReplay:"session_replay",sessionTrace:"session_trace",spa:"spa"},i={[n.pageViewEvent]:1,[n.pageViewTiming]:2,[n.metrics]:3,[n.jserrors]:4,[n.ajax]:5,[n.sessionTrace]:6,[n.pageAction]:7,[n.spa]:8,[n.sessionReplay]:9}}},n={};function i(e){var t=n[e];if(void 0!==t)return t.exports;var o=n[e]={exports:{}};return r[e](o,o.exports,i),o.exports}i.m=r,i.d=(e,t)=>{for(var r in t)i.o(t,r)&&!i.o(e,r)&&Object.defineProperty(e,r,{enumerable:!0,get:t[r]})},i.f={},i.e=e=>Promise.all(Object.keys(i.f).reduce(((t,r)=>(i.f[r](e,t),t)),[])),i.u=e=>(({78:"page_action-aggregate",147:"metrics-aggregate",242:"session-manager",317:"jserrors-aggregate",348:"page_view_timing-aggregate",412:"lazy-feature-loader",439:"async-api",538:"recorder",590:"session_replay-aggregate",675:"compressor",733:"session_trace-aggregate",786:"page_view_event-aggregate",873:"spa-aggregate",898:"ajax-aggregate"}[e]||e)+"."+{78:"ac76d497",147:"3dc53903",148:"1a20d5fe",242:"2a64278a",317:"49e41428",348:"bd6de33a",412:"2f55ce66",439:"30bd804e",538:"1b18459f",590:"cf0efb30",675:"ae9f91a8",733:"83105561",786:"06482edd",860:"03a8b7a5",873:"e6b09d52",898:"998ef92b"}[e]+"-1.236.0.min.js"),i.o=(e,t)=>Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call(e,t),e={},t="NRBA:",i.l=(r,n,o,a)=>{if(e[r])e[r].push(n);else{var s,c;if(void 0!==o)for(var u=document.getElementsByTagName("script"),d=0;d {s.onerror=s.onload=null,clearTimeout(h);var i=e[r];if(delete e[r],s.parentNode&&s.parentNode.removeChild(s),i&&i.forEach((e=>e(n))),t)return t(n)},h=setTimeout(l.bind(null,void 0,{type:"timeout",target:s}),12e4);s.onerror=l.bind(null,s.onerror),s.onload=l.bind(null,s.onload),c&&document.head.appendChild(s)}},i.r=e=>{"undefined"!=typeof Symbol&&Symbol.toStringTag&&Object.defineProperty(e,Symbol.toStringTag,{value:"Module"}),Object.defineProperty(e,"__esModule",{value:!0})},i.j=364,i.p="https://js-agent.newrelic.com/",(()=>{var e={364:0,953:0};i.f.j=(t,r)=>{var n=i.o(e,t)?e[t]:void 0;if(0!==n)if(n)r.push(n[2]);else{var o=new Promise(((r,i)=>n=e[t]=[r,i]));r.push(n[2]=o);var a=i.p+i.u(t),s=new Error;i.l(a,(r=>{if(i.o(e,t)&&(0!==(n=e[t])&&(e[t]=void 0),n)){var o=r&&("load"===r.type?"missing":r.type),a=r&&r.target&&r.target.src;s.message="Loading chunk "+t+" failed.\n("+o+": "+a+")",s.name="ChunkLoadError",s.type=o,s.request=a,n[1](s)}}),"chunk-"+t,t)}};var t=(t,r)=>{var n,o,[a,s,c]=r,u=0;if(a.some((t=>0!==e[t]))){for(n in s)i.o(s,n)&&(i.m[n]=s[n]);if(c)c(i)}for(t&&t(r);u {i.r(o);var e=i(3325),t=i(5763);const r=Object.values(e.D);function n(e){const n={};return r.forEach((r=>{n[r]=function(e,r){return!1!==(0,t.Mt)(r,"".concat(e,".enabled"))}(r,e)})),n}var a=i(9144);var s=i(5546),c=i(385),u=i(8e3),d=i(5938),f=i(3960),l=i(50);class h extends d.W{constructor(e,t,r){let n=!(arguments.length>3&&void 0!==arguments[3])||arguments[3];super(e,t,r),this.auto=n,this.abortHandler,this.featAggregate,this.onAggregateImported,n&&(0,u.R)(e,r)}importAggregator(){let e=arguments.length>0&&void 0!==arguments[0]?arguments[0]:{};if(this.featAggregate||!this.auto)return;const r=c.il&&!0===(0,t.Mt)(this.agentIdentifier,"privacy.cookies_enabled");let n;this.onAggregateImported=new Promise((e=>{n=e}));const o=async()=>{let t;try{if(r){const{setupAgentSession:e}=await Promise.all([i.e(860),i.e(242)]).then(i.bind(i,3228));t=e(this.agentIdentifier)}}catch(e){(0,l.Z)("A problem occurred when starting up session manager. This page will not start or extend any session.",e)}try{if(!this.shouldImportAgg(this.featureName,t))return void(0,u.L)(this.agentIdentifier,this.featureName);const{lazyFeatureLoader:r}=await i.e(412).then(i.bind(i,8582)),{Aggregate:o}=await r(this.featureName,"aggregate");this.featAggregate=new o(this.agentIdentifier,this.aggregator,e),n(!0)}catch(e){(0,l.Z)("Downloading and initializing ".concat(this.featureName," failed..."),e),this.abortHandler?.(),n(!1)}};c.il?(0,f.b)((()=>o()),!0):o()}shouldImportAgg(r,n){return r!==e.D.sessionReplay||!1!==(0,t.Mt)(this.agentIdentifier,"session_trace.enabled")&&(!!n?.isNew||!!n?.state.sessionReplay)}}var g=i(7633),p=i(7894);class m extends h{static featureName=g.t9;constructor(r,n){let i=!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];if(super(r,n,g.t9,i),("undefined"==typeof PerformanceNavigationTiming||c.Tt)&&"undefined"!=typeof PerformanceTiming){const n=(0,t.OP)(r);n[g.Dz]=Math.max(Date.now()-n.offset,0),(0,f.K)((()=>n[g.qw]=Math.max((0,p.z)()-n[g.Dz],0))),(0,f.b)((()=>{const t=(0,p.z)();n[g.OJ]=Math.max(t-n[g.Dz],0),(0,s.p)("timing",["load",t],void 0,e.D.pageViewTiming,this.ee)}))}this.importAggregator()}}var v=i(1117),b=i(1284);class y extends v.w{constructor(e){super(e),this.aggregatedData={}}store(e,t,r,n,i){var o=this.getBucket(e,t,r,i);return o.metrics=function(e,t){t||(t={count:0});return t.count+=1,(0,b.D)(e,(function(e,r){t[e]=w(r,t[e])})),t}(n,o.metrics),o}merge(e,t,r,n,i){var o=this.getBucket(e,t,n,i);if(o.metrics){var a=o.metrics;a.count+=r.count,(0,b.D)(r,(function(e,t){if("count"!==e){var n=a[e],i=r[e];i&&!i.c?a[e]=w(i.t,n):a[e]=function(e,t){if(!t)return e;t.c||(t=x(t.t));return t.min=Math.min(e.min,t.min),t.max=Math.max(e.max,t.max),t.t+=e.t,t.sos+=e.sos,t.c+=e.c,t}(i,a[e])}}))}else o.metrics=r}storeMetric(e,t,r,n){var i=this.getBucket(e,t,r);return i.stats=w(n,i.stats),i}getBucket(e,t,r,n){this.aggregatedData[e]||(this.aggregatedData[e]={});var i=this.aggregatedData[e][t];return i||(i=this.aggregatedData[e][t]={params:r||{}},n&&(i.custom=n)),i}get(e,t){return t?this.aggregatedData[e]&&this.aggregatedData[e][t]:this.aggregatedData[e]}take(e){for(var t={},r="",n=!1,i=0;i t.max&&(t.max=e),e 2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(e,r,j.t,n),c.il&&((0,t.OP)(e).initHidden=Boolean("hidden"===document.visibilityState),(0,N.N)((()=>(0,s.p)("docHidden",[(0,p.z)()],void 0,j.t,this.ee)),!0),(0,O.bP)("pagehide",(()=>(0,s.p)("winPagehide",[(0,p.z)()],void 0,j.t,this.ee))),this.importAggregator())}}var P=i(3081);class C extends h{static featureName=P.t9;constructor(e,t){let r=!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(e,t,P.t9,r),this.importAggregator()}}var R,I=i(2210),k=i(1214),H=i(2177),L={};try{R=localStorage.getItem("__nr_flags").split(","),console&&"function"==typeof console.log&&(L.console=!0,-1!==R.indexOf("dev")&&(L.dev=!0),-1!==R.indexOf("nr_dev")&&(L.nrDev=!0))}catch(e){}function z(e){try{L.console&&z(e)}catch(e){}}L.nrDev&&H.ee.on("internal-error",(function(e){z(e.stack)})),L.dev&&H.ee.on("fn-err",(function(e,t,r){z(r.stack)})),L.dev&&(z("NR AGENT IN DEVELOPMENT MODE"),z("flags: "+(0,b.D)(L,(function(e,t){return e})).join(", ")));var M=i(6660);class B extends h{static featureName=M.t;constructor(r,n){let i=!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(r,n,M.t,i),this.skipNext=0;try{this.removeOnAbort=new AbortController}catch(e){}const o=this;o.ee.on("fn-start",(function(e,t,r){o.abortHandler&&(o.skipNext+=1)})),o.ee.on("fn-err",(function(t,r,n){o.abortHandler&&!n[M.A]&&((0,I.X)(n,M.A,(function(){return!0})),this.thrown=!0,(0,s.p)("err",[n,(0,p.z)()],void 0,e.D.jserrors,o.ee))})),o.ee.on("fn-end",(function(){o.abortHandler&&!this.thrown&&o.skipNext>0&&(o.skipNext-=1)})),o.ee.on("internal-error",(function(t){(0,s.p)("ierr",[t,(0,p.z)(),!0],void 0,e.D.jserrors,o.ee)})),this.origOnerror=c._A.onerror,c._A.onerror=this.onerrorHandler.bind(this),c._A.addEventListener("unhandledrejection",(t=>{const r=function(e){let t="Unhandled Promise Rejection: ";if(e instanceof Error)try{return e.message=t+e.message,e}catch(t){return e}if(void 0===e)return new Error(t);try{return new Error(t+(0,D.P)(e))}catch(e){return new Error(t)}}(t.reason);(0,s.p)("err",[r,(0,p.z)(),!1,{unhandledPromiseRejection:1}],void 0,e.D.jserrors,this.ee)}),(0,O.m$)(!1,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),(0,k.gy)(this.ee),(0,k.BV)(this.ee),(0,k.em)(this.ee),(0,t.OP)(r).xhrWrappable&&(0,k.Kf)(this.ee),this.abortHandler=this.#e,this.importAggregator()}#e(){this.removeOnAbort?.abort(),this.abortHandler=void 0}onerrorHandler(t,r,n,i,o){"function"==typeof this.origOnerror&&this.origOnerror(...arguments);try{this.skipNext?this.skipNext-=1:(0,s.p)("err",[o||new F(t,r,n),(0,p.z)()],void 0,e.D.jserrors,this.ee)}catch(t){try{(0,s.p)("ierr",[t,(0,p.z)(),!0],void 0,e.D.jserrors,this.ee)}catch(e){}}return!1}}function F(e,t,r){this.message=e||"Uncaught error with no additional information",this.sourceURL=t,this.line=r}let U=1;const q="nr@id";function G(e){const t=typeof e;return!e||"object"!==t&&"function"!==t?-1:e===c._A?0:(0,I.X)(e,q,(function(){return U++}))}function V(e){if("string"==typeof e&&e.length)return e.length;if("object"==typeof e){if("undefined"!=typeof ArrayBuffer&&e instanceof ArrayBuffer&&e.byteLength)return e.byteLength;if("undefined"!=typeof Blob&&e instanceof Blob&&e.size)return e.size;if(!("undefined"!=typeof FormData&&e instanceof FormData))try{return(0,D.P)(e).length}catch(e){return}}}var X=i(7243);class W{constructor(e){this.agentIdentifier=e,this.generateTracePayload=this.generateTracePayload.bind(this),this.shouldGenerateTrace=this.shouldGenerateTrace.bind(this)}generateTracePayload(e){if(!this.shouldGenerateTrace(e))return null;var r=(0,t.DL)(this.agentIdentifier);if(!r)return null;var n=(r.accountID||"").toString()||null,i=(r.agentID||"").toString()||null,o=(r.trustKey||"").toString()||null;if(!n||!i)return null;var a=(0,_.M)(),s=(0,_.Ht)(),c=Date.now(),u={spanId:a,traceId:s,timestamp:c};return(e.sameOrigin||this.isAllowedOrigin(e)&&this.useTraceContextHeadersForCors())&&(u.traceContextParentHeader=this.generateTraceContextParentHeader(a,s),u.traceContextStateHeader=this.generateTraceContextStateHeader(a,c,n,i,o)),(e.sameOrigin&&!this.excludeNewrelicHeader()||!e.sameOrigin&&this.isAllowedOrigin(e)&&this.useNewrelicHeaderForCors())&&(u.newrelicHeader=this.generateTraceHeader(a,s,c,n,i,o)),u}generateTraceContextParentHeader(e,t){return"00-"+t+"-"+e+"-01"}generateTraceContextStateHeader(e,t,r,n,i){return i+"@nr=0-1-"+r+"-"+n+"-"+e+"----"+t}generateTraceHeader(e,t,r,n,i,o){if(!("function"==typeof c._A?.btoa))return null;var a={v:[0,1],d:{ty:"Browser",ac:n,ap:i,id:e,tr:t,ti:r}};return o&&n!==o&&(a.d.tk=o),btoa((0,D.P)(a))}shouldGenerateTrace(e){return this.isDtEnabled()&&this.isAllowedOrigin(e)}isAllowedOrigin(e){var r=!1,n={};if((0,t.Mt)(this.agentIdentifier,"distributed_tracing")&&(n=(0,t.P_)(this.agentIdentifier).distributed_tracing),e.sameOrigin)r=!0;else if(n.allowed_origins instanceof Array)for(var i=0;i 2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(r,n,Z.t,i),(0,t.OP)(r).xhrWrappable&&(this.dt=new W(r),this.handler=(e,t,r,n)=>(0,s.p)(e,t,r,n,this.ee),(0,k.u5)(this.ee),(0,k.Kf)(this.ee),function(r,n,i,o){function a(e){var t=this;t.totalCbs=0,t.called=0,t.cbTime=0,t.end=E,t.ended=!1,t.xhrGuids={},t.lastSize=null,t.loadCaptureCalled=!1,t.params=this.params||{},t.metrics=this.metrics||{},e.addEventListener("load",(function(r){_(t,e)}),(0,O.m$)(!1)),c.IF||e.addEventListener("progress",(function(e){t.lastSize=e.loaded}),(0,O.m$)(!1))}function s(e){this.params={method:e[0]},T(this,e[1]),this.metrics={}}function u(e,n){var i=(0,t.DL)(r);i.xpid&&this.sameOrigin&&n.setRequestHeader("X-NewRelic-ID",i.xpid);var a=o.generateTracePayload(this.parsedOrigin);if(a){var s=!1;a.newrelicHeader&&(n.setRequestHeader("newrelic",a.newrelicHeader),s=!0),a.traceContextParentHeader&&(n.setRequestHeader("traceparent",a.traceContextParentHeader),a.traceContextStateHeader&&n.setRequestHeader("tracestate",a.traceContextStateHeader),s=!0),s&&(this.dt=a)}}function d(e,t){var r=this.metrics,i=e[0],o=this;if(r&&i){var a=V(i);a&&(r.txSize=a)}this.startTime=(0,p.z)(),this.listener=function(e){try{"abort"!==e.type||o.loadCaptureCalled||(o.params.aborted=!0),("load"!==e.type||o.called===o.totalCbs&&(o.onloadCalled||"function"!=typeof t.onload)&&"function"==typeof o.end)&&o.end(t)}catch(e){try{n.emit("internal-error",[e])}catch(e){}}};for(var s=0;s 1?e[1]=i:e.push(i)}else e[0]&&e[0].headers&&s(e[0].headers,n)&&(this.dt=n);function s(e,t){var r=!1;return t.newrelicHeader&&(e.set("newrelic",t.newrelicHeader),r=!0),t.traceContextParentHeader&&(e.set("traceparent",t.traceContextParentHeader),t.traceContextStateHeader&&e.set("tracestate",t.traceContextStateHeader),r=!0),r}}function x(e,t){this.params={},this.metrics={},this.startTime=(0,p.z)(),this.dt=t,e.length>=1&&(this.target=e[0]),e.length>=2&&(this.opts=e[1]);var r,n=this.opts||{},i=this.target;"string"==typeof i?r=i:"object"==typeof i&&i instanceof Y?r=i.url:c._A?.URL&&"object"==typeof i&&i instanceof URL&&(r=i.href),T(this,r);var o=(""+(i&&i instanceof Y&&i.method||n.method||"GET")).toUpperCase();this.params.method=o,this.txSize=V(n.body)||0}function A(t,r){var n;this.endTime=(0,p.z)(),this.params||(this.params={}),this.params.status=r?r.status:0,"string"==typeof this.rxSize&&this.rxSize.length>0&&(n=+this.rxSize);var o={txSize:this.txSize,rxSize:n,duration:(0,p.z)()-this.startTime};i("xhr",[this.params,o,this.startTime,this.endTime,"fetch"],this,e.D.ajax)}function E(t){var r=this.params,n=this.metrics;if(!this.ended){this.ended=!0;for(var o=0;o 2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(e,t,we.t,r),this.importAggregator()}}new class{constructor(e){let t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]?arguments[1]:(0,_.ky)(16);c._A?(this.agentIdentifier=t,this.sharedAggregator=new y({agentIdentifier:this.agentIdentifier}),this.features={},this.desiredFeatures=new Set(e.features||[]),this.desiredFeatures.add(m),Object.assign(this,(0,a.j)(this.agentIdentifier,e,e.loaderType||"agent")),this.start()):(0,l.Z)("Failed to initial the agent. Could not determine the runtime environment.")}get config(){return{info:(0,t.C5)(this.agentIdentifier),init:(0,t.P_)(this.agentIdentifier),loader_config:(0,t.DL)(this.agentIdentifier),runtime:(0,t.OP)(this.agentIdentifier)}}start(){const t="features";try{const r=n(this.agentIdentifier),i=[...this.desiredFeatures];i.sort(((t,r)=>e.p[t.featureName]-e.p[r.featureName])),i.forEach((t=>{if(r[t.featureName]||t.featureName===e.D.pageViewEvent){const n=function(t){switch(t){case e.D.ajax:return[e.D.jserrors];case e.D.sessionTrace:return[e.D.ajax,e.D.pageViewEvent];case e.D.sessionReplay:return[e.D.sessionTrace];case e.D.pageViewTiming:return[e.D.pageViewEvent];default:return[]}}(t.featureName);n.every((e=>r[e]))||(0,l.Z)("".concat(t.featureName," is enabled but one or more dependent features has been disabled (").concat((0,D.P)(n),"). This may cause unintended consequences or missing data...")),this.features[t.featureName]=new t(this.agentIdentifier,this.sharedAggregator)}})),(0,T.Qy)(this.agentIdentifier,this.features,t)}catch(e){(0,l.Z)("Failed to initialize all enabled instrument classes (agent aborted) -",e);for(const e in this.features)this.features[e].abortHandler?.();const r=(0,T.fP)();return delete r.initializedAgents[this.agentIdentifier]?.api,delete r.initializedAgents[this.agentIdentifier]?.[t],delete this.sharedAggregator,r.ee?.abort(),delete r.ee?.get(this.agentIdentifier),!1}}}({features:[J,m,S,class extends h{static featureName=oe;constructor(t,r){if(super(t,r,oe,!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2]),!c.il)return;const n=this.ee;let i;(0,k.QU)(n),this.eventsEE=(0,k.em)(n),this.eventsEE.on(se,(function(e,t){this.bstStart=(0,p.z)()})),this.eventsEE.on(ae,(function(t,r){(0,s.p)("bst",[t[0],r,this.bstStart,(0,p.z)()],void 0,e.D.sessionTrace,n)})),n.on(ce+ne,(function(e){this.time=(0,p.z)(),this.startPath=location.pathname+location.hash})),n.on(ce+ie,(function(t){(0,s.p)("bstHist",[location.pathname+location.hash,this.startPath,this.time],void 0,e.D.sessionTrace,n)}));try{i=new PerformanceObserver((t=>{const r=t.getEntries();(0,s.p)(te,[r],void 0,e.D.sessionTrace,n)})),i.observe({type:re,buffered:!0})}catch(e){}this.importAggregator({resourceObserver:i})}},C,xe,B,class extends h{static featureName=de;constructor(e,r){if(super(e,r,de,!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2]),!c.il)return;if(!(0,t.OP)(e).xhrWrappable)return;try{this.removeOnAbort=new AbortController}catch(e){}let n,i=0;const o=this.ee.get("tracer"),a=(0,k._L)(this.ee),s=(0,k.Lg)(this.ee),u=(0,k.BV)(this.ee),d=(0,k.Kf)(this.ee),f=this.ee.get("events"),l=(0,k.u5)(this.ee),h=(0,k.QU)(this.ee),g=(0,k.Gm)(this.ee);function m(e,t){h.emit("newURL",[""+window.location,t])}function v(){i++,n=window.location.hash,this[ve]=(0,p.z)()}function b(){i--,window.location.hash!==n&&m(0,!0);var e=(0,p.z)();this[pe]=~~this[pe]+e-this[ve],this[ye]=e}function y(e,t){e.on(t,(function(){this[t]=(0,p.z)()}))}this.ee.on(ve,v),s.on(be,v),a.on(be,v),this.ee.on(ye,b),s.on(ge,b),a.on(ge,b),this.ee.buffer([ve,ye,"xhr-resolved"],this.featureName),f.buffer([ve],this.featureName),u.buffer(["setTimeout"+le,"clearTimeout"+fe,ve],this.featureName),d.buffer([ve,"new-xhr","send-xhr"+fe],this.featureName),l.buffer([me+fe,me+"-done",me+he+fe,me+he+le],this.featureName),h.buffer(["newURL"],this.featureName),g.buffer([ve],this.featureName),s.buffer(["propagate",be,ge,"executor-err","resolve"+fe],this.featureName),o.buffer([ve,"no-"+ve],this.featureName),a.buffer(["new-jsonp","cb-start","jsonp-error","jsonp-end"],this.featureName),y(l,me+fe),y(l,me+"-done"),y(a,"new-jsonp"),y(a,"jsonp-end"),y(a,"cb-start"),h.on("pushState-end",m),h.on("replaceState-end",m),window.addEventListener("hashchange",m,(0,O.m$)(!0,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),window.addEventListener("load",m,(0,O.m$)(!0,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),window.addEventListener("popstate",(function(){m(0,i>1)}),(0,O.m$)(!0,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),this.abortHandler=this.#e,this.importAggregator()}#e(){this.removeOnAbort?.abort(),this.abortHandler=void 0}}],loaderType:"spa"})})(),window.NRBA=o})(); window.jQuery || document.write(' ') CKEDITOR_BASEPATH='https://f1000research.com/js/vendor/ckeditor/' window.reactTheme = 'research'; window.MathJax = { CommonHTML: { linebreaks: { automatic: true } }, 'HTML-CSS': { linebreaks: { automatic: true } }, SVG: { linebreaks: { automatic: true } }, AuthorInit: function() { MathJax.Hub.Register.MessageHook('End Process', function () { let timeout = false; // holder for timeout id const delay = 250; // delay after event is "complete" to run callback const reflowMath = function() { const dispFormulas = document.querySelectorAll('.disp-formula.panel'); if (!dispFormulas) { return; } for (const dispFormula of dispFormulas) { const child = dispFormula.querySelector('.MathJax_Preview').nextSibling.firstChild; const isMultiline = MathJax.Hub.getAllJax(dispFormula)[0].root.isMultiline; if (dispFormula.offsetWidth < child.offsetWidth || isMultiline) { MathJax.Hub.Queue(['Rerender', MathJax.Hub, dispFormula]); } } }; window.addEventListener('resize', function() { clearTimeout(timeout); // clear the timeout timeout = setTimeout(reflowMath, delay); // start timing for event "completion" }); }); }, }; if (window.location.hash == '#_=_'){ window.location = window.location.href.split('#')[0] } !function(f,b,e,v,n,t,s){if(f.fbq)return;n=f.fbq=function() {n.callMethod? n.callMethod.apply(n,arguments):n.queue.push(arguments)} ;if(!f._fbq)f._fbq=n; n.push=n;n.loaded=!0;n.version='2.0';n.queue=[];t=b.createElement(e);t.async=!0; t.src=v;s=b.getElementsByTagName(e)[0];s.parentNode.insertBefore(t,s)}(window, document,'script','https://connect.facebook.net/en_US/fbevents.js'); fbq('init', '1641728616063202'); fbq('track', "PixelInitialized", {}); (function(h,o,t,j,a,r){ h.hj=h.hj||function(){(h.hj.q=h.hj.q||[]).push(arguments)}; h._hjSettings={hjid:2318163,hjsv:6}; a=o.getElementsByTagName('head')[0]; r=o.createElement('script');r.async=1; r.src=t+h._hjSettings.hjid+j+h._hjSettings.hjsv; a.appendChild(r); })(window,document,'https://static.hotjar.com/c/hotjar-','.js?sv='); search file_upload Submit your research search menu close search Browse Gateways & Collections How to Publish Submit your Research My Submissions Article Guidelines Article Guidelines (New Versions) Open Data, Software and Code Guidelines Open Data and Accessible Source Materials Guidelines (HSS) Open Data, Software and Code Guidelines (PSE) Prepublication Checks Production Process Posters and Slides Guidelines Document Guidelines Article Processing Charges Peer Review Finding Article Reviewers About How it Works For Reviewers Our Advisors Policies Glossary FAQs For Developers Newsroom Contact My Research Submissions Content and Tracking Alerts My Details Sign In file_upload Submit your research { "@context": "https://schema.org", "@type": "ScholarlyArticle", "mainEntityOfPage": { "@type": "WebPage", "@id": "https://f1000research.com/articles/14-1139" }, "headline": "Assessing the Impact of Social Culture and National Regulations on Women’s Engagement in Logistics...", "datePublished": "2025-10-20T09:50:07", "dateModified": "2025-10-20T09:50:07", "author": [ { "@type": "Person", "name": "Nabiira Nantongo" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Joseph Ntayi" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Sheila Namagembe" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Marcia Mkansi" } ], "publisher": { "@type": "Organization", "name": "F1000Research", "logo": { "@type": "ImageObject", "url": "https://f1000research.com/img/AMP/F1000Research_image.png", "height": 480, "width": 60 } }, "image": { "@type": "ImageObject", "url": "https://f1000research.com/img/AMP/F1000Research_image.png", "height": 1200, "width": 150 }, "description": " Background Women remain underrepresented in leadership within Uganda’s logistics sector, despite national commitments to gender equality. This study examines how national regulations and laws and social culture shape women’s engagement in decision-making, and whether regulations mediate culture’s influence. Methods A quantitative cross-sectional survey was administered to 298 logistics professionals sampled from private logistics companies, industry associations, and regulatory bodies. Using Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM), we assessed reliability/validity of constructs and tested direct and mediated relationships among social culture, national regulations and laws, and women’s engagement in decision-making (WEDM). Model fit and predictive relevance were evaluated (e.g., SRMR, R2, Q2). Results National regulations and laws had a positive, statistically significant effect on WEDM (β = 0.036, p = 0.002), underscoring the role of formal legal frameworks in advancing women’s leadership. Social culture showed no significant direct effect on WEDM (β = 0.002, p = 0.942). However, culture negatively influenced regulations (β = −0.265, p < 0.001), and a significant indirect (mediated) pathway from social culture to WEDM via regulations was detected (β = −0.008, p = 0.039), indicating full mediation. Correlations mirrored these patterns (national regulations–WEDM r = 0.377, p < 0.001; social culture–WEDM r = −0.224, p < 0.001; social culture–regulations r = −0.182, p = 0.002). The model demonstrated good fit (SRMR = 0.075) and strong explanatory power (R2 = 0.971 for WEDM; Q2 = 0.969). Conclusions Robust and enforced national legal frameworks are pivotal for increasing women’s engagement in logistics decision-making, and they can buffer or redirect the effects of restrictive cultural norms. While the direct impact of social culture on engagement was non-significant, its indirect effect through regulations highlights the importance of coupling legal reforms with consistent enforcement and organisational practices to convert rights into outcomes. Policy and practice should therefore integrate (i) targeted gender-equality regulations and monitoring, (ii) organisational interventions (e.g., transparent promotion, anti-bias systems, leadership development), and (iii) societal initiatives that progressively shift norms, to achieve durable, inclusive leadership pipelines in logistics and similar male-dominated sectors. " } { "@context": "http://schema.org", "@type": "BreadcrumbList", "itemListElement": [ { "@type": "ListItem", "position": "1", "item": { "@id": "https://f1000research.com/", "name": "Home" } }, { "@type": "ListItem", "position": "2", "item": { "@id": "https://f1000research.com/browse/articles", "name": "Browse" } }, { "@type": "ListItem", "position": "3", "item": { "@id": "https://f1000research.com/articles/14-1139", "name": "Assessing the Impact of Social Culture and National Regulations on..." } } ] } Home Browse Assessing the Impact of Social Culture and National Regulations on... ALL Metrics - Views Downloads Get PDF Get XML Cite How to cite this article Nantongo N, Ntayi J, Namagembe S and Mkansi M. Assessing the Impact of Social Culture and National Regulations on Women’s Engagement in Logistics Decision-Making in Uganda [version 1; peer review: awaiting peer review] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :1139 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.171481.1 ) NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. Close Copy Citation Details Export Export Citation Sciwheel EndNote Ref. Manager Bibtex ProCite Sente EXPORT Select a format first Track Share ▬ ✚ Research Article Assessing the Impact of Social Culture and National Regulations on Women’s Engagement in Logistics Decision-Making in Uganda [version 1; peer review: awaiting peer review] Nabiira Nantongo https://orcid.org/0009-0001-2230-2427 1 , Joseph Ntayi 2 , Sheila Namagembe 1 , Marcia Mkansi 3 Nabiira Nantongo https://orcid.org/0009-0001-2230-2427 1 , Joseph Ntayi 2 , Sheila Namagembe 1 , Marcia Mkansi 3 PUBLISHED 20 Oct 2025 Author details Author details 1 Transport and Logistics Management, MAKERERE UNIVERSITY BUSINESS SCHOOL, Kampala, Kampala, Uganda 2 Procurement and supply chain management, Makerere University Business School, Kampala, Central Region, Uganda 3 Graduate research, UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AFRICA, Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa Nabiira Nantongo Roles: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Funding Acquisition, Methodology, Software, Writing – Original Draft Preparation, Writing – Review & Editing Joseph Ntayi Roles: Supervision, Writing – Review & Editing Sheila Namagembe Roles: Supervision, Writing – Review & Editing Marcia Mkansi Roles: Supervision, Writing – Review & Editing OPEN PEER REVIEW REVIEWER STATUS AWAITING PEER REVIEW Abstract Background Women remain underrepresented in leadership within Uganda’s logistics sector, despite national commitments to gender equality. This study examines how national regulations and laws and social culture shape women’s engagement in decision-making, and whether regulations mediate culture’s influence. Methods A quantitative cross-sectional survey was administered to 298 logistics professionals sampled from private logistics companies, industry associations, and regulatory bodies. Using Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM), we assessed reliability/validity of constructs and tested direct and mediated relationships among social culture, national regulations and laws, and women’s engagement in decision-making (WEDM). Model fit and predictive relevance were evaluated (e.g., SRMR, R 2 , Q 2 ). Results National regulations and laws had a positive, statistically significant effect on WEDM (β = 0.036, p = 0.002), underscoring the role of formal legal frameworks in advancing women’s leadership. Social culture showed no significant direct effect on WEDM (β = 0.002, p = 0.942). However, culture negatively influenced regulations (β = −0.265, p < 0.001), and a significant indirect (mediated) pathway from social culture to WEDM via regulations was detected (β = −0.008, p = 0.039), indicating full mediation. Correlations mirrored these patterns (national regulations–WEDM r = 0.377, p < 0.001; social culture–WEDM r = −0.224, p < 0.001; social culture–regulations r = −0.182, p = 0.002). The model demonstrated good fit (SRMR = 0.075) and strong explanatory power (R 2 = 0.971 for WEDM; Q 2 = 0.969). Conclusions Robust and enforced national legal frameworks are pivotal for increasing women’s engagement in logistics decision-making, and they can buffer or redirect the effects of restrictive cultural norms. While the direct impact of social culture on engagement was non-significant, its indirect effect through regulations highlights the importance of coupling legal reforms with consistent enforcement and organisational practices to convert rights into outcomes. Policy and practice should therefore integrate (i) targeted gender-equality regulations and monitoring, (ii) organisational interventions (e.g., transparent promotion, anti-bias systems, leadership development), and (iii) societal initiatives that progressively shift norms, to achieve durable, inclusive leadership pipelines in logistics and similar male-dominated sectors. READ ALL READ LESS Keywords Women’s engagement, decision-making, logistics sector, national regulations, social culture, Uganda, regulations, Culture Corresponding Author(s) Nabiira Nantongo ( [email protected] ) Close Corresponding author: Nabiira Nantongo Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Grant information: The author(s) declared that no grants were involved in supporting this work. Copyright: © 2025 Nantongo N et al . This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. How to cite: Nantongo N, Ntayi J, Namagembe S and Mkansi M. Assessing the Impact of Social Culture and National Regulations on Women’s Engagement in Logistics Decision-Making in Uganda [version 1; peer review: awaiting peer review] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :1139 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.171481.1 ) First published: 20 Oct 2025, 14 :1139 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.171481.1 ) Latest published: 20 Oct 2025, 14 :1139 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.171481.1 ) 1. Introduction In recent decades, governments worldwide have implemented policies to increase women’s representation in corporate boardrooms ( Terjesen et al., 2015 ; Chandler, 2016 ). This focus on gender diversity in corporate leadership has gained attention from academic, business, and political sectors, driven by the need for diverse perspectives and advocacy for gender balance ( Smith et al., 2019 ; Malik, 2024 ). The logistics and supply chain management (LSCM) sector has recognised the importance of gender diversity since the 1970s, coinciding with the passage of anti-discrimination legislation, such as the Civil Rights Act of 1964 in the U.S. Efforts have been made to promote the inclusion of women and minority groups in leadership roles ( Yang et al., 2024 ). In Uganda, the logistics sector plays a crucial role in driving economic development, influencing trade and supply chain management ( Ainomugisha, 2022 ; Muvawala et al., 2021 ; Lawrence & Mupa, 2024 ). Although there is growing recognition of women’s contributions, socio-cultural norms often limit their engagement. Traditionally, women have been conditioned to prioritise domestic roles, while men pursue careers, leading to male dominance in leadership positions. Educational disparities in technical and business fields further hinder women’s competitiveness for leadership roles ( Nekhili & Gatfaoui, 2013 ; Cimirotic et al., 2017 ). Women’s underrepresentation in Uganda’s logistics leadership stems primarily from socio-cultural factors rather than personal deficiencies ( Ouedraogo, 2018 ). Cultural norms influence women’s ability to express themselves, which evolves in response to external influences ( Kahsay et al., 2021 ). Even with advancements in the labour market, traditional barriers such as gender bias and stereotypes continue to hinder upward mobility ( Akpinar-Sposito, 2013 ; Galsanjigmed & Sekiguchi, 2023 ). Addressing these challenges requires scrutiny of social institutions that reinforce or contest gender roles, including governance representation and societal factors such as economic development and religiosity ( Chizema et al., 2015 ). In response, some countries have adopted quota systems to enhance women’s leadership representation, successfully increasing their roles in decision-making ( Bosha, 2014 ). Nations such as Norway, Spain, Finland, and Rwanda have achieved significant gains through these systems ( Seierstad & Huse, 2017 ; Zubeyr et al., 2013 ). For example, Rwanda’s (2003) constitutional amendment mandated at least 30% representation for women in government roles, boosting female participation in decision-making ( Kang, 2013 ). In Uganda, the National Gender Policy (1997) and Uganda Gender Policy (2007) advocate for gender balance and support women’s rights. However, specific policies addressing women’s engagement in business sectors, such as logistics, are lacking, as existing regulations primarily focus on political contexts. There is an urgent need for policies targeting gender disparities in the business sector to promote diversity and inclusion in leadership. Increasing women’s engagement in logistics leadership not only advances gender equality but also contributes to economic growth, in alignment with Sustainable Development Goals (SDG 5 and SDG 10), Uganda Vision 2040, the National Development Program III, and the African Union Agenda 2063 Goal 17. This study, grounded in positivist philosophy, posits that knowledge is acquired through measurable phenomena, employing an empirical and objective approach. A cross-sectional survey design was employed to efficiently capture women’s engagement in decision-making roles within the logistics sector. Stratified random sampling included 298 respondents. Quantitative data were collected via structured questionnaires, with validity, reliability and hypothesis testing assessed through Structural Equation Modelling (SEM). The research aims to assess the impact of social culture, national regulations and laws on women’s decision-making roles in logistics and recommend strategies to enhance their leadership engagement. 2. Literature review 2.1 Theoretical review Sandra Bem’s Gender Schema Theory (1981) examines how children internalise gender-defined attributes, including preferences, abilities, and behaviours. Bem (1981) argued that children learn societal roles for males and females from their cultural environment, with boys and girls developing masculine and feminine traits at an early age. Starr and Zurbriggen (2017) supported this notion, highlighting that children form gender schemas influenced by socialisation experiences, which in turn affect their categorisation and behaviour. In Uganda, traditional socialisation practices reinforce entrenched gender schemas, where girls are often directed toward domestic roles and boys toward leadership positions in areas like logistics. This contributes to the underrepresentation of women in leadership roles. Gender schemas shape institutional contexts, influencing the challenges women face and their motivation to pursue corporate leadership positions ( Lewellyn and Muller-Kahle, 2020 ). For instance, Ugandan cultural practices associate decision-making in logistics with masculinity, further solidified by the types of toys given to children. To encourage more women in logistics, early childhood education and altering parental attitudes are vital. However, Gender Schema Theory does not fully address systemic issues, such as workplace discrimination and unequal access to resources, nor does it account for women who succeed in leadership settings despite these barriers. These factors are better explained by Institutional Theory, which emphasises broader systemic changes needed to enhance women’s decision-making participation. Institutional Theory examines the social, political, and cultural contexts that shape women’s roles by identifying the formal and informal rules influencing these roles. It helps develop context-specific policy recommendations to enhance women’s engagement in decision-making. Initially developed by Meyer and Rowan in 1977 , this sociological perspective investigates how organisations adopt and conform to social norms and values ( Lewellyn and Muller-Kahle, 2020 ; Zaman et al., 2022 ). Organisations strive for legitimacy by responding to institutional pressures and aligning with societal expectations, particularly in competitive environments ( Allemand et al., 2014 ; Saeed et al., 2022 ). Institutional pressures encompass regulatory pressures stemming from laws and regulations, normative pressures arising from professional and cultural norms, and cognitive pressures reflecting shared beliefs about appropriate behaviour ( DiMaggio & Powell, 1983 ; Scott, 2001 ). According to Silva (2021), these dimensions shape organisational structures by influencing responses to external demands and obligations. The Theory emphasises that organisations adopt practices not only for efficiency but also for legitimacy ( Adedeji et al., 2020 ). However, it also highlights symbolic compliance, where organisations implement policies to align with societal norms without making substantial changes ( Ozkan, 2025 ), which may not lead to meaningful opportunities for women. To overcome challenges, institutional reforms must prioritise creating genuine opportunities for women in leadership. This includes enforcing gender equality regulations, promoting gender-sensitive practices, and shifting cultural norms to contest traditional gender roles. Addressing these barriers can enhance women’s engagement in decision-making roles, contributing to economic advancement and aligning with national objectives, such as Uganda Vision 2040 and the African Union Agenda 2063. 2.2 National regulations and women’s engagement in decision-making Advocates for strong regulatory interventions argue that national laws and policies are essential for creating an environment that fosters women’s leadership. Quota systems, affirmative action policies, and gender equality laws have proven effective in enhancing women’s representation in political and corporate decision-making. Rwanda’s constitutional quota has resulted in one of the highest proportions of women in parliament globally ( Kang, 2013 ). Uganda’s National Gender Policy (1997) and the Uganda Gender Policy (2007) also strive to dismantle barriers that obstruct women’s advancement ( Bosha, 2014 ). The inclusion of women in decision-making is essential for achieving gender equality and sustainable development ( Akinwale, 2023 ; Gupta et al., 2024 ). Despite various countries adopting legal frameworks for women’s governance engagement, their effectiveness is often debated. Rwanda’s gender quotas demonstrate that legal mandates can increase women’s involvement; however, questions remain about whether they address deeper systemic barriers or merely serve as cosmetic solutions. Additionally, Reddy & Jadhav (2019) note that gender quotas have enhanced female representation on corporate boards in many regions; however, they often encounter resistance due to their politically charged nature. Grounded in Institutional Theory, Terjesen et al. (2015) argue that regulatory, normative, and cognitive pressures influence the adoption of quotas. Besides, critics contend that quotas may not transform organisational cultures but rather fulfil legal requirements. Societal norms complicate this further; in supportive environments, quotas succeed, while in less supportive ones, they may appear tokenistic. Zhang (2020) emphasises that gender diversity’s success relies on legal and social support, and without cultural acceptance, mandatory measures may have minimal impact. While proponents like Kirsch (2018) assert that legal quotas are essential for increasing female corporate board engagement, sceptics argue that numerical parity does not equate to meaningful engagement. Further, Orazalin & Baydauletov (2020) suggest that quotas can promote diversity but require genuine organisational commitment to equity. Without addressing structural and cultural factors of gender inequality, quotas risk becoming symbolic rather than transformative. Nevertheless, Brieger et al. (2019) note that stronger emancipative forces lead to higher gender diversity on boards by challenging traditional norms emphasised by Zubeyr et al. (2013) , who indicate that regulatory measures with enforcement mechanisms enhance women’s leadership participation, compelling organisations to diversify. The logistics sector could particularly benefit from frameworks promoting gender diversity. In conclusion, national regulations are essential for fostering women’s engagement in decision-making, but their impact is influenced by socio-cultural and institutional contexts. A multifaceted approach combining legal frameworks with cultural transformation and organisational change is needed. Thus, the hypothesis; H1: National regulations positively influence women’s engagement in decision-making 2.3 Social culture and women’s engagement in decision-making The relationship between social culture and women’s engagement in decision-making is a complex and evolving topic, marked by contrasting findings. While many studies highlight social culture as a significant barrier to women’s leadership, recent research indicates that the restrictive influence of culture may be overstated, particularly as societal norms shift and economic demands evolve ( Adhikari & Kusakabe, 2022 ). This shift, facilitated by globalisation and educational advancements, has begun to advance gender diversity in organisational leadership. However, Hofstede Insights (2023) and Carrasco et al. (2020) argue that deep-rooted cultural biases still hinder women’s ascendancy in leadership roles, especially in societies with entrenched traditional gender roles. Eagly and Heilman (2022) further emphasise that cultural expectations significantly affect women’s opportunities and the legitimacy of their leadership. In Uganda, traditional gender norms within a patriarchal framework limit women’s decision-making engagement ( Namatovu & Kyejjusa, 2022 ), with rural communities perpetuating stereotypes that delegitimise women’s leadership aspirations. Despite this, evidence suggests that cultural attitudes in Uganda are evolving due to increased educational attainment, urbanisation, and exposure to global gender equality norms ( Mugisha et al., 2023 ). Religious and traditional practices exert a dual influence, with some serving as platforms for women’s empowerment ( Tripp, 2019 ). Globalisation introduces new ideas promoting gender equality, yet resistance remains where local cultural values conflict with these norms ( Kabeer & Subrahmanian, 2023 ). In conclusion, understanding the intricate relationship between social culture and women’s decision-making engagement requires examining the interplay of these global and local influences. Strategies to enhance women’s leadership must address cultural barriers while leveraging emerging opportunities for gender-inclusive leadership in Uganda and similar contexts. Therefore, the hypothesis; H2: Social culture negatively influences women’s engagement in decision-making 2.4 National laws and regulations mediate the relationship between social culture and women’s engagement in decision-making The relationship between social culture and women’s engagement in decision-making is complex, often mediated by national laws that reinforce or challenge cultural norms. Social culture, which includes traditional gender roles, can hinder women’s leadership, especially in patriarchal contexts ( Inglehart, 2021 ). However, institutional interventions, such as gender equality laws, can transform the influence of social culture on leadership opportunities. Institutional Theory suggests that organisations adapt to external regulatory pressures ( DiMaggio & Powell, 1983 ; Scott, 2014 ). In societies with restrictive norms, laws promoting gender equality can disrupt “normative inertia” and enhance women’s leadership visibility ( Kabeer & Subrahmanian, 2023 ). Additionally, cross-national studies affirm that strong gender equality frameworks weaken the negative impact of cultural biases on women’s leadership ( World Economic Forum, 2023 ; OECD, 2022 ), as evidenced by countries with comprehensive policies experiencing higher rates of women’s engagement ( Carrasco et al., 2020 ). Moreover, True & Parisi (2021) note that legal reforms can catalyse societal change, reshaping cultural attitudes toward women in leadership. However, the effectiveness of these laws relies on enforcement, political will, and societal acceptance ( Htun & Weldon, 2018 ). In Uganda, for example, traditional norms have limited women’s participation, but legal reforms like the 2006 Equal Opportunities Act have started to challenge these barriers ( Namatovu & Kyejjusa, 2022 ; Mugisha et al., 2023 ). Nevertheless, Adhikari and Kusakabe (2022) warn that without accountability and cultural sensitisation, laws may lead to mere “symbolic compliance” ( Sundström et al., 2017 ), failing to foster meaningful change. In conclusion, national laws mediate the impact of social culture on women’s decision-making. When well-enforced and supported by broader initiatives, legal reforms can disrupt traditional barriers to women’s leadership. Thus, the hypothesis. H3: National laws and regulations mediate the relationship between social culture and women’s engagement in decision making ( Figure 1 ) Adopted from literature and modified by the researcher 3. Methodology This study embraces a positivist philosophical stance, grounded in the belief that knowledge can be acquired through measurable and observable phenomena. As noted by Saunders et al. (2016) , positivism underscores the importance of empirical evidence and reasoning in understanding reality. By adhering to the fundamental principles of positivism, this research adopts an empirical, scientific, objective, and generalisable approach to examine the relationship between national regulations and laws, social culture and women’s engagement in decision-making within the logistics sector in Uganda. The study employed a cross-sectional design with a quantitative approach, utilising a questionnaire to gather data. The study population consisted of 4,730 logistics officers from various sectors, including industry associations (700), government regulatory bodies (350), and registered private logistics companies (3,500). Following the methodology outlined by Krejcie and Morgan (1970) , a total sample of 369 logistics practitioners was selected, comprising industry trade associations (106), government regulatory bodies (41), and registered private logistics companies (151). Out of the 369 distributed questionnaires, 298 (91%) were completed and deemed usable for analysis. National-level factors were operationalised into national regulations and social culture ( Ouedraogo, 2018 ), while women’s engagement in decision-making was operationalised into emotional engagement, behavioural engagement, physical engagement, and cognitive engagement ( William Kahn, 1990 ). 3.1 Data analysis This study utilised both descriptive and inferential statistical analyses. Descriptive analysis was conducted to produce summary statistics and frequency distributions, which aided in understanding the demographic and background characteristics of the respondents. In contrast, inferential analysis was employed to explore the relationships among the study variables. To achieve the research objectives, a two-step quantitative analytical approach was implemented using SmartPLS software. The first step involved evaluating the measurement model by testing for validity, reliability, indicator relevance, and collinearity, in accordance with the guidelines of Ramayah et al. (2018) . The second step focused on assessing the structural model by analysing path coefficients, regression results, and model fit indices, as recommended by Hair (2014) . The study employed Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM), a second-generation statistical technique well-suited for evaluating both latent and manifest variables modelled in both formative and reflective ways ( Hair et al., 2010 ). Given the inclusion of both reflective and formative higher-order constructs in the model, PLS-SEM was considered appropriate for testing the hypothesised relationships among the variables. Ethical approval for this study was obtained from the Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research, Makerere University Business School (MUBS) under the Makerere University Research Ethics Framework. Approval was granted on 15 July 2023, through an official introduction and clearance letter, Reference No. MUBS/FGSR/2023/07/015, which authorized the researcher to conduct data collection among logistics companies, industry associations, and regulatory agencies in Uganda. Independent Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval was not required, as the study involved non-clinical survey and interview data obtained from adult professionals (aged 18 years and above) and posed minimal risk to participants. All participants were provided with a full explanation of the study’s purpose and voluntarily provided informed written consent prior to participation. Confidentiality and anonymity were strictly maintained throughout the research process. 3.2 Validity and reliability In this study, the internal reliability of the questionnaire was evaluated using Cronbach’s alpha coefficients, calculated through the inter-item consistency method as advised by Cho and Kim (2015) . As shown in Table III , all computed Cronbach’s alpha values surpassed the threshold of 0.70, indicating acceptable internal consistency and reliability of the measurement scales ( Nunnally, 1967 ). To assess the validity of the instrument, content validity was initially established through consultations with experts and practitioners. Their insights contributed to the development of the Content Validity Index (CVI), which produced satisfactory results: 0.88 for national regulations and laws, 0.89 for social culture and 0.94 for Women’s Engagement in Decision-Making, all exceeding the acceptable benchmark ( Natalio et al., 2014 ). Following this, convergent validity was evaluated by calculating the Average Variance Extracted (AVE) and Composite Reliability (CR), in accordance with the guidelines provided by Hair et al. (2010) . As illustrated in Table III , all constructs exhibited composite reliability values above 0.70 and AVE values exceeding the 0.50 threshold ( Table I ), affirming convergent validity ( Henseler et al., 2015 ; Fornell & Larcker, 1981 ). Moreover, discriminant validity was assessed using the Heterotrait-Monotrait (HTMT) ratio of correlations. Table II demonstrates that all HTMT values were below the critical cut-off value of 0.90, thereby satisfying the criteria for discriminant validity ( Yusoff et al., 2020 ). Consequently, the constructs utilised in this study were both reliable and valid, confirming that the instrument effectively measured the intended study variables. Table I. Convergent validity (AVE). Average variance extracted (AVE) Women’s engagement in decision-making Behavioural engagement 0.599 Cognitive engagement 0.500 Emotional engagement 0.511 Physical engagement 0.655 National-level factors National regulations and laws 0.543 Social culture 0.598 Table II. Discriminant validity (HTMT). BE CE EE NLF NRL PE SC WEDM Behavioural engagement (BE) Cognitive engagement (CE) 0.688 Emotional engagement (EE) 0.474 0.470 National level factors (NLF) 0.068 0.081 0.195 National regulations and laws (NRL) 0.202 0.385 0.499 0.532 Physical engagement (PE) 0.815 0.697 0.285 0.115 0.241 Social culture (SC) 0.235 0.274 0.170 0.822 0.212 0.318 Women’s engagement in decision making (WEDM) 0.898 0.894 0.705 0.049 0.400 0.698 0.240 Table III. Reliability statistics (Cronbach Alpha, composite reliability). Cronbach’s alpha Composite reliability (rho_a) Composite reliability (rho_c) Women’s engagement in decision making Behavioural engagement 0.831 0.838 0.882 Cognitive engagement 0.742 0.743 0.829 Physical engagement 0.739 0.773 0.850 Emotional engagement 0.760 0.763 0.839 National level factors National regulations and laws 0.879 0.883 0.905 Social culture 0.864 0.871 0.899 3.2.1 Construct validity In this study, construct validity was evaluated through the assessment of both convergent and discriminant validity, following the recommendations of Blumberg et al. (2014) . Convergent validity focused on determining whether items intended to measure the same construct were highly correlated, thereby confirming internal consistency and unidimensionality. This was assessed using Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA), during which the Average Variance Extracted (AVE) was calculated for each latent construct. According to Hair et al. (2010) , convergent validity was deemed adequate when AVE values exceeded the threshold of 0.50, and all item loadings were statistically significant and above 0.60. This indicates that each construct captured a sufficient proportion of variance from its associated indicators. Additionally, discriminant validity, which ensures that conceptually distinct constructs are empirically distinguishable, was assessed using both the Fornell–Larcker criterion and the Heterotrait-Monotrait (HTMT) ratio of correlations. HTMT values were compared against the conservative threshold of 0.85, in line with recent methodological guidance, to confirm the absence of construct overlap ( Henseler et al., 2015 ). To establish comprehensive construct validity, the study first conducted an Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) to uncover the underlying structure of the measurement items, followed by CFA to confirm and validate that structure. The integration of EFA and CFA, along with rigorous validity assessments, ensured that the constructs utilised in this study were both theoretically grounded and empirically robust. 3.2.2 Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) To evaluate construct validity, an Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) was performed before conducting a Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA). The purpose of the EFA was to empirically identify items that corresponded with the theoretical constructs, following the guidelines established by Hair et al. (2010) . Only factors with eigenvalues greater than 1.0 were retained, and items needed to demonstrate factor loadings of at least 0.50 to be considered significant. Items exhibiting cross-loadings exceeding 0.50 across multiple factors were excluded to improve discriminant clarity. Principal Component Analysis (PCA) was used as the extraction method to enhance the interpretation of the factor structure. Furthermore, the Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) measure of sampling adequacy and Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity were employed to confirm the appropriateness of the data for factor analysis and to verify the presence of significant inter-item correlations. 3.2.3 EFA of National level factors According to Table IV , factor loadings indicate the degree to which each item correlates with its underlying latent construct. According to Hair et al. (2010) , a loading of ≥0.60 is generally regarded as strong, while a threshold of 0.50 is typically acceptable ( Hulland, 1999 ). In the case of the National Regulations construct, all items (NRL1–NRL10) displayed moderate to strong factor loadings, each surpassing the 0.50 threshold, thereby signifying acceptable representation of the construct. Likewise, for the Social Culture construct, all items (SC1–SC9) demonstrated high factor loadings exceeding 0.60, indicating excellent internal consistency and robust factor convergence. The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measure of sampling adequacy was found to be 0.829, which falls within the acceptable range, indicating that the sample size is adequate for factor analysis ( Kaiser, 1974 ). Furthermore, Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity yielded an Approximate Chi-Square value of 2486.087 with 171 degrees of freedom, achieving a significance level of p < 0.001. This statistically significant outcome confirms that the correlation matrix includes sufficient inter-item correlations, thereby validating the use of factor analysis. Table IV. EFA of National-level factors. Items and code National regulations (NRL) Social culture (SC) There are policies or initiatives to increase women’s engagement in leadership roles in the logistics sector (NRL1) .625 The logistics sector has a central body tasked with oversight of regulations (NRL2) .771 My country regularly reviews existing significant regulations (NRL3) .585 National regulations and laws in the logistics sector promote gender equality and diversity in decision-making (NRL4) .651 My country conducts regulatory impact assessments on existing regulations (NRL5) .672 I have personally observed changes in the engagement of women in decision-making roles within the logistics sector as a result of these national regulations (NRL6) .600 Affirmative action programs implemented within the logistics sector promote women’s engagement in decision-making roles (NRL7) .518 logistics companies comply with these national regulations (NRL8) .685 I have observed improvements in women’s engagement in leadership positions due to national regulations tailored towards women’s decision-making (NRL9) .608 Regulations and laws provide a supportive framework for women’s career advancement (NRL10) .625 Our culture makes it harder for women to achieve career advancement in Uganda (SC1) .587 Because of my gender, people believe I possess lesser abilities in decision making especially in logistics (SC2) .639 Family responsibilities, including caregiving and household duties, hinder Ugandan women from progressing in their logistics careers (SC3) .641 Due to traditional gender roles in Uganda, I feel I am more likely to occupy a junior position in logistics, regardless of my qualifications (SC4) .723 Societal attitudes towards gender roles in Uganda impact my career progression in the logistics sector (SC5) .686 Because of my gender, I am expected to hold a lesser status both at work and in Ugandan society (SC6) .519 Cultural and religious norms in my community impact women’s career progression in the logistics sector (SC7) .586 Some women in Uganda face barriers to pursuing further education or training in logistics due to cultural and societal factors (SC8) .531 Eigen Value 5.123 3.836 Variance % 47.152 13.041 Cumulative % 47.152 60.193 Kaiser-Meyer Olkin Approx. Chi-Square Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity Df Sig .829 2486.087 171 0.00 3.2.4 EFA for women’s engagement in decision-making According to Table V , all forty items assessing women’s engagement in decision-making displayed strong internal consistency and convergent validity, with factor loadings exceeding the acceptable threshold of 0.50. The four underlying dimensions collectively accounted for 63.826% of the total variance, surpassing the minimum recommended threshold and indicating that the items effectively capture the intended constructs. The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) Measure of Sampling Adequacy was 0.803, exceeding the recommended benchmark of 0.80 and confirming the appropriateness of the data for factor analysis ( Kaiser, 1974 ). Furthermore, Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity produced an approximate Chi-Square value of 4700.207 with 780 degrees of freedom and a significance level of p < 0.001. This significant result demonstrates that the correlation matrix is not an identity matrix, indicating sufficient inter-item correlations to justify the use of factor analysis. Table V. EFA for Women’s engagement in decision making. Item and code Emotional engagement (EE) Behavioural engagement (BE) Physical engagement (PE) Cognitive engagement (CE) Engaging in decision-making makes me happy (EE1) .572 I feel emotionally invested in participating in decision-making processes (EE2) .733 Decision-making processes are personally meaningful and fulfilling (EE3) .682 In decision-making situations, my emotions drive my engagement (EE4) .519 It is difficult to detach myself from my job (EE5) .553 I have ever felt that my opinion or input was not valued because of my gender (EE6) .666 My job has a positive impact on my mood (EE7) .699 I feel happy when I am working intensely (EE8) .660 Time flies when I am working (EE9) .613 I always look forward to the next meeting when the meeting is over (EE10) .671 I am so involved in my work I lose track of time (BE1) .585 I do my job as I am expected to (BE2) .698 My job is so demanding (BE3) .602 I am really drawn into my job (BE4) .671 I feel involved in decision making (BE5) .512 Decision making is frustrating (BE6) .500 Decision making is rewarding (BE7) .714 I actively participate in decision-making processes in my workplace (BE8) .563 In decision-making situations, I take on leadership roles or responsibilities (BE9) .674 I am involved in implementing decisions or leading action plans resulting from decisions (BE10) .649 I physically attend meetings or gatherings related to decision-making processes in my workplace (PE1) .682 I actively participate in decision-making discussions by speaking up, presenting ideas, or offering proposals during these meetings (PE2) .727 I am frequently involved in physically implementing decisions (PE3) .656 My organisation has made me to become mentally resilient (PE4) .680 Promoting health and wellness enhances women’s physical engagement (PE5) .671 My working environment fosters a feeling of well-being (PE6) .610 Providing ergonomic and inclusive workspaces facilitates physical engagement (PE7) .703 My organisation encourages me to work with high level of focus, energy, and effort (PE8) .682 I feel that my work requires high levels of focus, energy, and effort (PE9) .697 My organisation makes me exert my full effort and energy to my job (PE10) .573 I put in a lot of effort to accomplish my work schedule (CE1) .648 I often seek information and critically analyse it before making decisions (CE2) .648 I actively contribute to discussions and problem-solving in decision-making contexts (CE3) .665 I often find myself exploring alternative solutions or perspectives in decision-making situations (CE4) .685 Even when I do not want to work, I force myself to do the work (CE5) .579 I’m always so involved in what I do, I forget everything around me (CE6) .668 I ask myself questions to check if I understand how to complete my job tasks (CE7) .640 I organise my work time well and set goals before going for a meeting (CE8) .632 I discuss my position with others in a meeting (CE9) .596 I ask questions to understand other colleague’s perspectives when discussing meeting content (CE10) .556 Eigen Value 7.972 3.259 2.519 2.354 Variance % 19.930 8.147 33.144 2.606 Cumulative % 19.930 28.077 61.221 63.826 Kaiser-Meyer Olkin Approx. Chi-Square Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity Df Sig .803 4700.207 780 0.00 3.2.5 Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) CFA plays a vital role in assessing the psychometric properties of constructs, including aspects such as item reliability, internal consistency, content validity, convergent validity, and discriminant validity. In this study, the constructs identified through Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) were validated through CFA to develop measurement models for these dimensions, utilising the Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM) approach. 3.2.6 CFA measurement model for National level factors Following the Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA), a total of 19 items initially exceeded the minimum factor loading threshold of 0.50. However, subsequent Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) revealed that only six items (SC1, SC3, SC4, SC5, SC6, and SC7) out of the original nine for the Social culture construct were deemed statistically significant and retained. In the case of the National Regulations and Laws construct, eight out of the ten items that had succeeded in the EFA phase met the more rigorous CFA threshold of 0.60 and were included in the final model. Figure 2 displays the standardised loadings, illustrating the strength of the correlations between each observed variable (item) and its corresponding latent construct within the broader domain of national-level factors. Figure 1. The conceptual model generated from literature review. Adapted from ( Ouedraogo, 2018 ; Kang, 2013 ; Kahn, 1990 ). Figure 2. The latent construct National level factors with its indicators; National regulations and laws (NRL) with its observed items (NRL1–NRL8) and Social culture (SC) with its observed items with (SC 1-SC 7) standardized loadings above 0.60, confirming convergent validity. 3.2.7 CFA measurement model for women engagement in decision making Following the Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA), all 40 items surpassed an initial threshold of 0.5. However, upon conducting the Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA), only five items related to cognitive engagement (CE1, CE2, CE3 CE7 and CE8) were recognised as significant, similarly only five items for emotional engagement (EE3, EE4, EE6, EE7 and EE8) also achieved an elevated threshold of 0.6 and above. For behavioural engagement, the number of items was reduced from ten to four remaining with (BE4, BE7, BE8, BE9 and BE10). Lastly, regarding physical engagement, all 10 items initially passed the EFA, but only three remained after CFA (PE1, PE2 and PE3). The figure below ( Figure 3 ) illustrates the correlations between each observed variable (item) and its corresponding latent construct (Women’s engagement in decision making). Figure 3. The latent construct Women engagement in decision making with its indicators; Behavioural engagement (BE) with its observed items (BE4, BE7, BE8, BE9, BE10), Emotional engagement (EE) with its observed items with (EE3, EE4, EE5, EE6, EE7, EE8) Cognitive engagement (CE) with its observed items (CE1, CE2, CE3, CE7, CE8) and Physical engagement (PE) with its observed items (CE1, PE2, PE3) with standardized loadings above 0.60, confirming convergent validity. 4. Presentation of results 4.1 Descriptive statistics The data presented in Table VI indicates that among 298 participants, logistics companies constitute the largest group at 50.7%, followed by industry associations at 35.6% and regulatory bodies at 13.8%. This diverse representation offers valuable insights into the dynamics of the sector and its regulatory environments, which are essential for understanding women’s roles in decision-making processes within logistics. In terms of ownership, local institutions lead at 38.7%, followed by government ownership at 22.5%, foreign ownership at 21.5%, and family ownership at 7.4%. This distribution highlights a significant influence from indigenous institutions and the potential for international collaboration. The duration of operation among institutions reveals that 39% have been established for over 15 years, indicating a level of stability and knowledge retention. Conversely, the presence of newer institutions (established within the last 1-5 years) suggests that the market remains open to innovation. Table VI. Descriptive statistics. Variable Category Frequency Percentage Category of organisation Industry association 106 35.6 Logistics company 151 50.7 Regulatory bodies 41 13.8 Ownership of this institution Family ownership 22 7.4 Foreign 64 21.5 Government 67 22.5 Local 145 38.7 Length of the institution being in operation Less than one year 6 2.0 1-5 years 49 16.4 6-10 years 91 30.5 11-15 years 34 11.4 More than 15 years 118 39.6 Number of employees Less than 50 94 31.5 Between 50 – 100 98 32.9 100 – 500 45 15.1 Above 500 61 20.5 Age bracket Below 35 years 157 52.7 35-45 years 115 38.6 Above 45 26 8.7 Level of qualification attained Bachelor’s Degree 169 56.7 Master’s Degree 68 22.8 PhD 6 2.0 Professional holder 38 12.8 Other 17 5.7 Current position in this institution Board member 42 14.1 Senior management 55 18.5 Middle management 116 38.9 Lower managemant 85 28.5 Service in this institution 1 – 5 years 166 55.7 6-10 years 98 32.9 10 years and above 34 11.4 Total 298 100 Regarding workforce size, 32.9% of respondents are from organisations with 50–100 employees, while 31.5% come from firms with fewer than 50 employees. Larger organisations, comprising 100–500 employees at 15.1% and those with over 500 employees at 20.5%, tend to exhibit more formal structures, which may influence the decision-making roles of women. The age distribution shows that 52.7% of respondents are under 35, reflecting a youthful workforce in logistics. Those aged 35-45 years account for 38.6%, which is crucial for evaluating women’s participation in decision-making. Only 8.7% are over 45, indicating limited representation of older professionals, which may pose challenges for women seeking advancement into leadership positions. Finally, the educational attainment data reveal that the majority of respondents (56.7%) hold a bachelor’s degree, illustrating that the logistics and related sectors are largely comprised of academically qualified professionals. Additionally, 22.8% of participants possess a master’s degree, suggesting a significant proportion of advanced professionals with the qualifications typically sought for leadership and policy-level roles. 4.2 Bivariate correlations Table VII shows there is a small but significant negative correlation (Pearson correlation = -0.182, p = 0.002) between national regulations and social culture, indicating that as national regulations strengthen, certain aspects of traditional social culture may weaken; meanwhile, a moderate positive correlation (Pearson Correlation = 0.377, p = 0.000) suggests that stronger national regulations are associated with higher levels of women’s engagement in decision-making, whereas a small to moderate negative correlation (Pearson correlation = -0.224, p = 0.000) highlights that traditional social cultural norms negatively affect women’s ability to engage in decision-making processes. This overall dynamic suggests a tension between the push for formal modernisation through supportive national regulations and the resistance posed by prevailing cultural norms. Table VII. Correlations. 1 2 3 National regulations and laws 1 Pearson Correlation 1 -.182 ** .377 ** Sig. (2-tailed) .002 .000 Social culture 2 Pearson Correlation -.182 ** 1 -.224 ** Sig. (2-tailed) .002 .000 Women’s engagement in decision-making Pearson Correlation .377 ** -.224 ** 1 Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). 4.3 Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) is a sophisticated multivariate statistical technique that merges elements of factor analysis and multiple regression to evaluate structural relationships among both observed and latent variables. In this study, SEM was employed for hypothesis testing due to its strong ability to assess both direct and indirect effects while also accounting for measurement error. Its use was further validated by its effectiveness in conducting mediation analyses, which allows for a more in-depth exploration of the mechanisms underlying the relationships between variables. As noted by Hair et al. (2010) , SEM enables the simultaneous estimation of multiple regression equations, providing a comprehensive and precise understanding of the intricate interrelationships among the constructs being studied. The structural model ( Figure 4 ) was assessed to examine the hypothesised relationships among constructs using SmartPLS 4.0. Results indicated that the model achieved satisfactory explanatory power and predictive relevance, as evidenced by acceptable R 2 , Q 2 , and fit indices (SRMR = 0.075). Direct path analyses revealed that national-level factors exert a significant positive influence on women’s engagement in decision-making, supporting the hypothesised relationship (0.027, 0.003). Correspondingly, mediation analysis further confirmed that national regulations and laws significantly mediate the relationship between social culture and women’s engagement in decision-making (β = 0.174, t = 4.025, p < 0.001), indicating that progressive regulatory frameworks can offset restrictive cultural norms and promote gender inclusivity in leadership. Figure 4. Structural model for the relationships among Social Culture, National Regulations and Laws, and Women’s Engagement in Decision-Making (WEDM). The figure presents the hypothesised paths tested using PLS-SEM, showing both direct and mediated relationships. Arrows indicate the direction and strength of influence among constructs. Path coefficients reveal that NRL → WEDM is significant, SC → WEDM is not significant, and SC → NRL → WEDM demonstrates a mediated effect. 4.3.1 Structural model evaluation results (coefficient of determination (r 2 )/percentage of variance explained, Q squared) Table VIII shows that the model demonstrates exceptional explanatory power, with national-level factors explained at 99.8% (R-square = 0.998, Adjusted R-square = 0.998) and women’s engagement in decision-making at 97.1% (R-square = 0.971, Adjusted R-square = 0.970), indicating strong predictive relevance and model accuracy, as evidenced by Q-squared values of 0.997 and 0.969, respectively, while the minimal difference between R-square and Adjusted R-square suggests robust performance without overfitting. Table VIII. Structural model evaluation results (coefficient of determination (r 2 ) /percentage of variance explained, Q squared). R-square R-square adjusted Q-squared National level factors 0.998 0.998 0.997 Women’s engagement in decision making 0.971 0.970 0.969 4.3.2 Model fit model estimates Table IX shows that the model fit. It was evaluated through key indices from the PLS-SEM output, revealing a standardised root mean square residual (SRMR) of 0.075, which is below the recommended threshold of 0.08, indicating a good fit to the data; the negligible discrepancy between the saturated model (3.308) and estimated model (3.311) for d_ULS supports this conclusion, despite unavailable values for d_G and NFI, with an infinite Chi-square value suggesting that the model still adequately represents the empirical data for structural analysis. Table IX. Model fit. Saturated model Estimated model SRMR 0.075 0.075 d_ULS 3.308 3.311 d_G n/a n/a Chi-square ∞ ∞ NFI n/a n/a 4.3.3 Testing for relationships The results from testing the direct paths between national-regulations and laws, social culture, and women’s engagement in decision-making are presented and elaborated below. Testing for direct relationships Hypothesis 1: There is a positive relationship between National regulations and laws and women’s engagement in decision-making in Uganda The results in Table X indicate that National regulations and laws (NRL) have a statistically significant positive effect on Women’s engagement in decision-making (WEDM), with a standardised path coefficient of 0.036, a t-value of 3.046, a p-value of 0.002, and a 95% bias-corrected confidence interval of 0.014 to 0.059, supporting hypothesis H1 and highlighting the importance of strong legal frameworks in enhancing women’s engagement in leadership roles within the logistics sector as illustrated in Figure 5 . Hypothesis 2: There is a positive correlation between social culture and women’s engagement in decision-making Table X. The standardised structural model estimates for direct hypothesised path. Hypothesised path (β) Std. error T-value P values 25% - 97.5% Bias confidence intervals Decision Direct effects H1 NRL → WEDM 0.036 0.011 3.046 0.002 (0.014-0.059) Supported H2 SC → WEDM 0.002 0.018 0.073 0.942 (-0.013-0.028) Not Supported SC → NRL -0.265 0.052 4.687 0.000 (-0.358- -0.183) Supported Indirect effects H3SC → NRL → WEDM -0.008 0.004 2.070 0.039 (-0.016- -0.002) Supported Figure 5. Illustrates the standardized factor loadings linking NRL to WEDM, demonstrating a positive and significant association. Arrows indicate the direction and strength of relationships between observed indicators and latent constructs. All retained loadings exceed 0.60, confirming construct validity and a good model fit. The analysis in Table X and Figure 6 reveals that the path coefficient from Social Culture (SC) to Women’s Engagement in Decision-Making (WEDM) is β = 0.002 with a t-value of 0.073 and a p-value of 0.942, indicating no statistically significant effect, as evidenced by the 95% bias-corrected confidence interval ranging from -0.013 to 0.028, which includes zero; thus, hypothesis H2 is not supported, suggesting that social culture does not directly influence women’s engagement in decision-making, possibly indicating that its effects are mediated by other factors or exerted indirectly, warranting further exploration. Figure 6. Illustrates the standardized factor loadings linking social culture (SC) to women’s engagement in decision making (WEDM), showing that social culture has no significant direct effect on women’s engagement in decision-making. Arrows represent the direction and magnitude of factor loadings, all of which exceed 0.60, confirming construct reliability and validity. Testing for indirect relationships Social and National regulations and laws The analysis in Table X and Figure 7 indicates that social culture has a statistically significant negative effect on national regulations and laws, with a path coefficient of β = -0.265, a T-value of 4.687, and a P-value of 0.000, suggesting that entrenched socio-cultural norms and traditional gender roles significantly hinder the development and implementation of policies supporting women’s engagement in decision-making, thereby illustrating how cultural resistance poses a substantial barrier to regulatory reform aimed at promoting gender equality. Figure 7. Illustrates the negative and statistically significant path from SC to NRL, indicating that restrictive social-cultural norms weaken the development and implementation of gender-supportive regulations. Arrows represent the standardized path coefficients and direction of influence between the constructs. According to the mediation testing guidelines established by Baron and Kenny (1986) , the process involves estimating three regression equations: first, regressing the mediator on the independent variable; second, regressing the dependent variable on the independent variable; and third, regressing the dependent variable on both the independent variable and the mediator. For mediation to be established, three conditions must be met: (i) the independent variable must significantly influence the mediator, where social culture acted as a negative influences on national regulations and laws; (ii) the independent variable must significantly impact the dependent variable where in this case, social culture did not influence women’s engagement in decision-making; and (iii) the mediator must significantly influence the dependent variable when included in the model, which, in this case, shows that national regulations and laws did influence women’s engagement in decision-making. Baron and Kenny suggest that the strongest evidence for mediation occurs when there is a significant indirect effect without a direct effect, a scenario they define as full mediation. Conversely, when both the indirect and direct effects are significant, it reflects partial mediation. In this context, the mediation variable (national regulations and laws) demonstrates full mediation between social culture and women’s engagement in decision-making. Hypothesis 3: National regulations and laws mediate the relationship between social culture and women’s engagement in decision making The findings in Table X and Figure 8 indicate that social culture indirectly affects women’s engagement in decision-making through national regulations supporting Hypothesis 3 as evidenced by a statistically significant standardised indirect effect (β = -0.008, t-value = 2.070, p-value = 0.039). This finding suggests that social culture influences women’s engagement in decision-making indirectly by shaping national regulations. Specifically, restrictive social-cultural norms weaken regulatory frameworks, which in turn diminish opportunities for women’s participation in leadership roles. While the effect size is small (β = -0.008), it is statistically meaningful and highlights the importance of addressing cultural barriers to strengthen policy effectiveness and promote gender equity. Figure 8. Presents the mediated pathway where SC indirectly influences WEDM through NRL. Arrows indicate the direction and strength of standardized path coefficients, confirming a significant indirect effect (β = –0.008, p = 0.039). This model demonstrates full mediation, where supportive national regulations offset the restrictive impact of social-cultural norms on women’s leadership engagement. 5. Discussion of findings and conclusion The results indicate that national regulations and laws (nrl) have a statistically significant positive effect on women’s engagement in decision-making (WEDM) (β = 0.036, t = 3.046, p = 0.002, 95% CI [0.014, 0.059]), supporting hypothesis H1 and emphasising the crucial role of strong legal and regulatory frameworks in advancing women’s participation in leadership roles within the logistics sector. This finding aligns with recent literature highlighting that institutional and regulatory reforms, such as gender equality laws, anti-discrimination policies, and affirmative action measures, create enabling environments that challenge entrenched biases and promote women’s leadership ( Kabeer & Subrahmanian, 2020 ; World Bank, 2023 ). Studies by the OECD (2022) and World Economic Forum (2023) similarly demonstrate that countries with robust gender-focused legislation witness higher female representation in decision-making roles, even within traditionally male-dominated sectors like logistics ( Smith, 2021 ). Moreover, Johnson & Lee (2022) assert that legal frameworks addressing workplace discrimination, maternity protections, and pay equity act as essential levers for dismantling structural barriers and influencing organisational culture towards greater inclusivity. However, the relatively modest standardised coefficient observed in this study suggests that while national regulations are significant, their impact may be incremental rather than transformative unless complemented by cultural and institutional changes ( Chattopadhyay & Duflo, 2023 ). Supporting this caution, several studies report that legal reforms, when poorly enforced or unsupported by societal shifts, often result in “symbolic compliance,” wherein formal laws exist without producing substantive change ( Sundström et al., 2017 ; True & Parisi, 2021 ). Deep-seated socio-cultural norms, weak institutional accountability, and limited political will can significantly undermine the effectiveness of gender equality laws, particularly in male-dominated industries like logistics. Therefore, while the present findings reinforce the critical role of strong national regulations in promoting women’s decision-making engagement, they also underscore the necessity for multi-layered strategies combining legal reforms with enforcement mechanisms, cultural transformation, and targeted capacity-building initiatives to achieve sustainable gender equity outcomes in leadership roles. The analysis conducted delineates the path coefficient from social culture (sc) to women’s engagement in decision-making (WEDM) as β = 0.002, exhibiting a t-value of 0.073 and a p-value of 0.942, which signifies a statistically insignificant relationship. The 95% bias-corrected confidence interval ranging from -0.013 to 0.028 encapsulates zero, thereby reinforcing the conclusion that hypothesis H2 is unsupported. These findings imply that social culture does not exert a direct influence on women’s engagement in decision-making roles within the logistics sector. This outcome diverges from a substantial body of existing literature that underscores the pivotal role of social culture in shaping gender dynamics and leadership opportunities. Scholars such as Acker (2006) contend that traditional gender norms and societal expectations significantly impact women’s leadership trajectories by perpetuating stereotypes that frame leadership as predominantly masculine. Similarly, the World Bank (2023) asserts that patriarchal social structures continue to obstruct women’s access to decision-making roles, particularly in male-dominated sectors such as logistics and transportation. Conversely, the absence of a direct effect in this study aligns with emerging research that posits structural and institutional mechanisms as mediators or buffers against the influence of social culture. Kabeer (2020) argues that while social norms establish a broader environment of gendered expectations, their direct impact may be mitigated when robust institutional frameworks, formal policies, or organisational interventions exist to counteract cultural biases. In highly formalised sectors like logistics, standardised procedures, corporate policies, and regulatory mandates may overshadow the nuanced influence of cultural attitudes, thereby diminishing the direct impact of social norms on leadership engagement. Furthermore, Krook & Mackay (2011) suggest that the relationship between social culture and women’s political or organisational participation is frequently indirect, mediated through factors such as institutional reforms, economic incentives, or advocacy efforts. This perspective aligns with hypothesis H3, which posits that national regulations and laws mediate the relationship between social culture and women’s engagement in decision-making. Consequently, the current context may elucidate the lack of a significant direct effect attributable to social culture, suggesting that alternative mechanisms, such as legal frameworks or organisational practices, assume a more immediate and substantial role. 5.1 Implications to the study Practical implications The findings elucidate significant practical implications for policymakers, organisational leaders, and development practitioners who are striving to enhance women’s engagement in decision-making within the logistics sector and other male-dominated industries. Firstly, the demonstrable positive impact of national regulations and laws on women’s engagement in decision-making underscores the imperative for robust legal frameworks that explicitly advocate for gender equality. It is critical that policymakers prioritise the design, implementation, and stringent enforcement of gender-responsive legislation, including anti-discrimination policies, mandates for equal opportunities, maternity protections, and affirmative action regulations. Nonetheless, the modest magnitude of the observed effect suggests that legislation in isolation is insufficient; hence, regulatory reforms must be bolstered by systematic monitoring, enforcement mechanisms, and institutional accountability structures to ensure that they translate into actionable practices rather than remaining mere symbolic gestures. Secondly, the non-significant direct effect of social culture indicates that institutional mechanisms can serve as effective buffers against the potentially constraining influence of traditional gender norms. For organisations operating within the logistics sector, this finding accentuates the necessity of embedding gender equity into formal organisational policies, recruitment and promotion practices, leadership development programs, and performance evaluation systems. Structured interventions such as gender-sensitive leadership training, transparent career advancement pathways, and anti-bias hiring practices can serve to mitigate subtle cultural biases that might otherwise obstruct women’s engagement in leadership roles. Thirdly, the results advocate for the implementation of integrated, multi-level strategies. Legal reforms should be complemented by organisational change initiatives and broader societal efforts directed at shifting cultural attitudes regarding gender and leadership. Stakeholders, including governmental bodies, logistics firms, industry associations, and civil society organisations, are urged to collaborate in promoting public awareness campaigns, educating communities about gender equality, and advocating for cultural transformations that normalise women’s participation in leadership roles across all sectors. Lastly, considering the indirect influence of social culture, there exists a compelling rationale for institutions to conduct periodic gender audits to evaluate the latent barriers that women may encounter in decision-making structures, despite the presence of formal legal protections. These internal assessments can guide ongoing improvements aimed at fostering genuinely inclusive environments. In summation, these findings advocate for a holistic approach that synergises legal frameworks, institutional practices, cultural shifts, and individual empowerment strategies to sustainably advance women’s leadership and decision-making engagement, particularly within sectors where historical gender disparities have been entrenched. Theoretical implications The findings of this investigation bear significant theoretical ramifications, particularly when interpreted through the frameworks of Institutional Theory and Gender Schema Theory. Primarily, the evidence supporting the influence of national regulations and laws on women’s engagement in decision-making substantiates pivotal propositions of Institutional Theory. As posited by DiMaggio and Powell (1983) , formal institutions exert influence on organisational behaviour and social practices through mechanisms including coercive, mimetic, and normative pressures. In this context, the substantial positive correlation between national legal frameworks and women’s leadership involvement underscores the role of coercive mechanisms such as gender equality legislation and anti-discrimination statutes in prompting organisations, particularly in traditionally male-dominated fields like logistics, to embrace more inclusive leadership structures. This finding corroborates the assertion that formal institutional arrangements serve as potent tools for disrupting entrenched gender hierarchies and fostering normative transformations towards gender equity ( Scott, 2014 ). Nevertheless, the observed modest effect size indicates that while institutional pressures are instrumental, they necessitate reinforcement by complementary cultural and organisational dynamics to effectuate substantial and lasting change. This nuance is consistent with an extended perspective in neo-institutional Theory, acknowledging that institutional reforms often require broader societal backing and internal organisational adaptations to fully manifest in practice ( Greenwood et al., 2017 ). Second, the non-significant direct effect of social culture on women’s decision-making engagement provides critical insights through the lens of Gender Schema Theory. Proposed by Bem (1981) , Gender Schema Theory asserts that societal norms and cultural beliefs regarding gender roles establish cognitive structures or schemas that shape individuals’ perceptions and behaviours towards gender-appropriate roles. Historically, social culture has been regarded as a significant determinant of women’s leadership opportunities, with prevailing gender schemas reinforcing male dominance in decision-making domains. However, the findings suggest that the direct effect of social culture may be attenuated or mediated by the presence of robust formal institutional mechanisms, such as comprehensive legal frameworks and organisational policies. This observation aligns with evolving perspectives within gender theory that highlight the malleability of gender schemas and their potential disruption in the presence of formal structures and progressive interventions ( Ridgeway & Correll, 2004 ). 5.2 Study contributions This study addresses a critical research gap by examining the factors influencing women’s engagement in decision-making, specifically within the logistics sector, which is traditionally male-dominated and under-researched regarding gender equity issues. By demonstrating the significant positive role of national regulations and laws (NRL) and the non-significant direct effect of social culture (SC) on women’s engagement, this research provides context-specific empirical evidence, particularly relevant to developing countries like Uganda. Utilising Institutional Theory and Gender Schema Theory, this study extends theoretical debates by illustrating how formal institutional structures, such as national laws and regulations, can act as transformative forces that regulate behaviour and reshape cognitive gender schemas. The finding that social culture does not directly influence women’s leadership engagement but may operate through institutional mechanisms supports evolving theories that advocate for multi-level models incorporating both institutional and cultural dimensions to understand gender dynamics. This nuanced understanding advances the intersection between institutional frameworks and gender cognitive structures, enriching both feminist institutionalism and gender leadership theories. From an empirical perspective, this study validates the argument that strong legal frameworks are necessary but insufficient for achieving gender equity. The modest path coefficient suggests that legal reforms must be complemented by organisational and cultural initiatives to provoke substantial change. Additionally, this research introduces evidence that in highly regulated sectors, formal organisational policies can buffer the direct impact of traditional social culture on women’s leadership opportunities, inspiring future empirical inquiries into sector-specific dynamics. Employing a quantitative approach with structural equation modelling (SEM) to analyse direct relationships and mediation pathways demonstrates the utility of sophisticated statistical techniques in understanding complex gender-related dynamics within organisations. The rigorous testing of hypotheses using bootstrapped confidence intervals, bias correction, and multi-path analysis contributes to improving methodological standards for future gender studies in leadership research. 5.3 Key takeaways/recommendations for practice and policy Governments and regulatory bodies must not only enact gender equality measures such as anti-discrimination laws and gender quotas but also ensure that these laws are rigorously enforced and monitored, thereby translating legal rights into tangible benefits. In addition to compliance with legal requirements, organisations should foster cultural change by implementing gender sensitivity training, anti-bias initiatives, and mentorship programs to effectively dismantle informal barriers that hinder women’s advancement. Collaborative partnerships among government entities, the private sector, academia, and civil society organisations are essential for advocating gender-inclusive reforms, sharing best practices, and maintaining momentum for change Institutions ought to conduct gender audits and impact assessments to monitor progress, identify ongoing barriers, and refine interventions aimed at promoting women’s leadership in the logistics sector. 5.4 Limitations of the study and directions for future research The study concentrated specifically on the logistics sector in Uganda, a developing country context. While this provides valuable insights relevant to the sector, it also restricts the generalizability of the findings to other industries. Gender dynamics can vary significantly across sectors due to differing organisational cultures and regulatory environments. Future research should consider examining multiple sectors, such as finance, healthcare, education, and technology and diverse geographical contexts to assess how national regulations and cultural factors influence women’s leadership engagement in various settings. Additionally, the use of a cross-sectional research design limits the ability to establish causality. The identified relationships between national regulations, social culture, and women’s engagement are associative rather than inherently causal. To gain a deeper understanding of causal relationships and the evolving impact of social culture and institutional reforms, future studies should employ longitudinal designs that track changes over time. The data for both independent and dependent variables were collected using the same self-reported survey instrument within a quantitative framework, which raises the possibility of common method bias, even though efforts were made to mitigate this issue. Future research could benefit from mixed-methods approaches to examine how social culture evolves and how women navigate or challenge cultural barriers in their leadership journeys. Moreover, the study focused on national regulations and laws as mediators; therefore, further research should investigate additional mediators such as organisational climate and leadership development programs and moderators, including individual resilience and industry gender composition. These factors could clarify or strengthen the relationship between national regulations, culture, and women’s engagement in decision-making. Author contributions statement Following the Contributor Roles Taxonomy (CRediT), the authors made the following specific contributions to this work: Nantongo Nabiira: Conceptualization; Methodology; Data curation; Formal analysis; Investigation; Visualization; Writing – original draft; Writing – review & editing; Project administration; Joseph M. Ntayi: Supervision; Validation; Writing – review & editing; Sheila Namagembe: Supervision; Methodological guidance; Writing – review & editing and Marcia Mkansi: Supervision; Conceptual refinement; Writing – review & editing. All authors have read and approved the final manuscript and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work. Ethical approval Ethical approval for this study was obtained from the Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research, Makerere University Business School (MUBS) under the Makerere University Research Ethics Framework. Approval was granted on 15 July 2023, through an official introduction and clearance letter, Reference No. MUBS/FGSR/2023/07/015, which authorized the researcher to conduct data collection among logistics companies, industry associations, and regulatory agencies in Uganda. Independent Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval was not required, as the study involved non-clinical survey and interview data obtained from adult professionals (aged 18 years and above) and posed minimal risk to participants. All participants were provided with a full explanation of the study’s purpose and voluntarily provided informed written consent prior to participation. Confidentiality and anonymity were strictly maintained throughout the research process. Data availability The project contains the following underlying data. Extended data Repository name: Assessing the Impact of Social Culture and National Regulations on Women’s Engagement in Logistics Decision-Making in Uganda . figshare. https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.30305218 ( Nantongo et al., 2025 ). Questionnaire. Women engagement in decision making. Data are available under DOI: https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.30305218 References Acker J: Inequality Regimes: Gender, Class, and Race in Organisations. Gend. Soc. 2006; 20 (4): 441–464. Publisher Full Text Adedeji BS, Ong TS, Uzir MUH, et al. : Corporate governance and performance of medium-sized firms in Nigeria: does sustainability initiative matter? Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society. 2020; 20 (3): 401–427. Publisher Full Text Adhikari R, Kusakabe K: Gender Transformations in Globalizing Societies: Implications for Women’s Leadership. Gend. Dev. 2022; 30 (1): 27–42. Ainomugisha E: Information Technology Adoption, Supply Chain Integration and Logistics Performance: A case of Logistics firms in Uganda. Makerere University Business School; 2022. (Doctoral dissertation). Akinwale AA: Gender equity and social progress: empowering women and girls to drive sustainable development in SUB–SAHARAN AFRICA. International Journal of Innovation Research and Advanced Studies. 2023. Akpinar-Sposito C: Career Barriers for Women Executives and the Glass Ceiling Syndrome: The Case Study Comparison between French and Turkish Women Executives. Procedia. Soc. Behav. Sci. 2013; 75 : 488–497. Publisher Full Text Allemand I, Barbe O, Brullebaut B: Institutional Theory and gender diversity on European boards. Vie & Sciences Économiques. 2014; 2 : 73–92. Baron RM, Kenny DA:The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations.J. Pers. Soc. Psychol.1986; 51 (6): 1173–1182. Publisher Full Text PubMed Abstract | Bem SL: Gender Schema Theory: A Cognitive Account of Sex Typing. Psychol. Rev. 1981; 88 : 354–364. Publisher Full Text Blumberg B, Cooper D, Schindler P: EBOOK: Business research methods. McGraw Hill; 2014. Bosha SL: Quota Systems and Women Political Leadership Development in Africa. Journal of African Union Studies, Vol. 3, No. 2/3, Political Leadership in Africa: Renaissance or Regression? Jo-Ansie van Wyk. 2014; 2014 : 103–114. Brieger SA, Francoeur C, Welzel C, et al. : Empowering women: The role of emancipative forces in board gender diversity. J. Bus. Ethics. 2019; 155 : 495–511. Publisher Full Text Carrasco A, Francoeur C, Labelle R, et al. : Cultural Values and Gender Diversity on Corporate Boards: Evidence from Cross-Country Analyses. J. Int. Bus. Stud. 2020; 51 (2): 287–309. Chandler A: Women on corporate boards: a comparison of parliamentary discourse in the United Kingdom and France. Polit. Gend. 2016; 12 (3): 443–468. Publisher Full Text Chattopadhyay R, Duflo E: Empowering Women Through Public Policy: Evidence from Recent Reforms. J. Econ. Perspect. 2023; 37 (1): 45–66. Chizema A, Kamuriwo DS, Shinozawa Y: Women on corporate boards around the world: Triggers and barriers. Leadersh. Q. 2015; 26 (6): 1051–1065. Publisher Full Text Cho E, Kim S: Cronbach’s coefficient alpha: Well known but poorly understood.Organ Res. Methods.2015; 18 (2): 207–230. Cimirotic R, Duller V, Feldbauer-Durstmüller B, et al. : Enabling factors that contribute to women reaching leadership positions in business organisations. Manag. Res. Rev. 2017; 40 (2): 165–194. Publisher Full Text DiMaggio PJ, Powell W: The iron cage revisited: institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organisational fields. Am. Sociol. Rev. 1983; 48 (2): 116–147. Publisher Full Text Eagly AH, Heilman ME: Gender Stereotypes and Attitudes Toward Female Leaders: Progress and Challenges. Annu. Rev. Organ. Psych. Organ. Behav. 2022; 9 : 1–26. Fornell C, Larcker DF:Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J. Mark Res. 1981; 18 (1): 39–50. Publisher Full Text Galsanjigmed E, Sekiguchi T: Challenges Women Experience in Leadership Careers: An Integrative Review. Merits. 2023; 3 (2): 366–389. MDPI AG. Publisher Full Text Greenwood R, Oliver C, Lawrence TB, et al. : The SAGE Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism. Sage Publications; 2nd eds. 2017. Gupta S, Wei M, Tzempelikos N, et al. : Women empowerment: challenges and opportunities for sustainable development goals. Qual. Mark. Res. Int. J. 2024; 27 (4): 608–630. Hair JF: A primer on partial least squares structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM). Sage; 2014. Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, et al. : Multivariate data analysis. Pearson Education; 7th ed. 2010. Henseler J, Ringle CM, Sarstedt M:A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling.J. Acad. Mark Sci.2015; 43 (1): 115–135. Publisher Full Text Hofstede Insights : Country comparison: Cultural dimensions.2023. https://www.hofstede-insights.com Htun M, Weldon SL: The Logics of Gender Justice: State Action on Women’s Rights Around the World. Cambridge University Press; 2018. Hulland J: Use of partial least squares (PLS) in strategic management research: A review of four recent studies. Strateg. Manag. J. 1999; 20 (2): 195–204. <a target="xrefwindow" id="d16015e4516" href="https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199902)20:2 Publisher Full Text Inglehart R: Religion’s sudden decline: What’s causing it, and what comes next?Oxford University Press; 2021. Johnson R, Lee H: Breaking Barriers: Gender Diversity and Legal Frameworks in Male-Dominated Industries. Journal of Business and Public Policy. 2022; 9 (3): 112–130. Kabeer N: Gender Equality, Norms, and Women’s Empowerment: Insights from Development Studies. Fem. Econ. 2020; 26 (2): 1–26. Publisher Full Text Kabeer N, Subrahmanian R: Institutions, Agency and Gendered Power: Rethinking the Empowerment Agenda. Gend. Dev. 2020; 28 (2): 177–193. Kabeer N, Subrahmanian R: Institutions, Norms, and Gender Equality: Strategies for Social Transformation. UN Women Publications; 2023. Kahn WA: Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work.Acad. Manage J.1990; 33 (4): 692–724. Kahsay GA, Norden A, Bulte E: Women participation in formal decision-making: Empirical evidence from participatory forest management in Ethiopia.Glob. Environ. Change.2021; 70 : 102363. Publisher Full Text Kaiser HF: An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika. 1974; 39 (1): 31–36. Kang A: The effect of gender quota laws on the election of women: Lessons from Niger. Women’s Stud. Int. Forum. 2013; 41 (2): 94–102. Publisher Full Text Kirsch A: The gender composition of corporate boards: A review and research agenda. Leadersh. Q. 2018; 29 (2): 346–364. Krejcie RV, Morgan DW: Determining sample size for research activities. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 1970; 30 (3):607–610. Publisher Full Text Krook ML, Mackay F: Gender, Politics and Institutions: Towards a Feminist Institutionalism. Palgrave Macmillan; 2011. Lawrence SA, Mupa MN: Innovative approaches to enhancing logistics for adapting to the evolving demands of manufacturing companies in East Africa through improved lean strategies. World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews. 2024; 23 : 2179–2189. Publisher Full Text Lewellyn KB, Muller-Kahle MI: The corporate Board Ceiling: The Role of Empowerment and culture in Shaping Board Gender Diversity. Journal of Business Etjics. 2020; 16 : 329–346. Publisher Full Text Malik T: Exploring Gender Diversity in Leadership Roles. Finance & Audit Research Archive Letters. 2024; 1 (4): 142–158. Mugisha R, Namatovu J, Ssewanyana S: Gendered Pathways to Leadership: Emerging Trends in Uganda’s Labor Market. African Journal of Gender and Development. 2023; 8 (1): 65–83. Muvawala J, Sebukeera H, Ssebulime K: Socio-economic impacts of transport infrastructure investment in Uganda: Insight from frontloading expenditure on Uganda’s urban roads and highways. Res. Transp. Econ. 2021; 88 : 100971. Publisher Full Text Meyer J, Rowan B: Institutionalised organisations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. Am. J. Sociol. 1977; 83 : 340–363. Namatovu R, Kyejjusa S: Cultural Norms and Gender Equality in Uganda: A Policy Perspective. Makerere Journal of Social Research. 2022; 9 (2): 87–110. Nantongo N, Ntayi J, Namagembe S, et al. : Assessing the Impact of Social Culture and National Regulations on Women’s Engagement in Logistics Decision-Making in Uganda. Dataset. figshare. 2025. Publisher Full Text Natalio MA, Faria CD, Teixeira-Salmela LF, et al. : Content validation of a clinical assessment instrument for stair ascent and descent in individuals with hemiparesis. Braz. J. Phys. Ther. 2014; 18 (04): 353–363. Nekhili M, Gatfaoui H: Are demographic attributes and firm characteristics drivers of gender diversity? Investigating women’s positions on French boards of directors. J. Bus. Ethics. 2013; 118 (2): 227–249. Publisher Full Text Nunnally JC: Psychometric theory . 1967;McGraw Hill. OECD: Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women: A Report on Legal Frameworks. OECD Publishing; 2022. Orazalin N, Baydauletov M: Corporate social responsibility strategy and corporate environmental and social performance: The moderating role of board gender diversity. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2020; 27 (4): 1664–1676. Ouedraogo A: Determinants of under-representation of women on Boards of Directors: an exploratory study of African public and private firms. Economics and Business Review. 2018; 4 (18): 98–113. Publisher Full Text Ozkan AM: Sustainable development and institutional theory. In: Integrating organizational theories with sustainable development.IGI Global Scientific Publishing. 2025; 59–80. Publisher Full Text Ramayah T, Hair JF, Cheah J, et al. : Partial least squares structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM) using SmartPLS 3.0: An updated and practical guide to statistical analysis . 2018;Pearson Malaysia. Reddy S, Jadhav AM: Gender diversity in boardrooms–A literature review. Cogent Economics & Finance. 2019; 7 (1): 1644703. Ridgeway CL, Correll SJ: Unpacking the gender system: A theoretical perspective on gender beliefs and social relations. Gend. Soc. 2004; 18 (4): 510–531. Publisher Full Text Rwanda: Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda, as amended through 2015. WIPO; 2003; Official Gazette No. Special of 24/12/2015. Reference Source Saeed A, Baloch MS, Riaz H: Global insights on TMT gender diversity in controversial industries: a legitimacy perspective. J. Bus. Ethics. 2022; 179 (3): 711–731. Saunders M, Lewis P, Thornhill A: Research Methods for Business Students. Harlow: Pearson; 7th ed. 2016. Seierstad C, Huse M: Gender Quotas on Corporate Boards in Norway: Ten Years Later and Lessons Learned. Gender Diversity in the Boardroom. 2017; 11–45. Publisher Full Text Scott WR: Institutions and Organisations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2nd ed. 2001. Scott WR: Institutions and Organisations: Ideas, Interests, and Identities. Sage Publications; 4th ed. 2014. Smith A: Gender Diversity in Logistics: Trends and Challenges. Int. J. Logist. Manag. 2021; 32 (4): 1050–1072. Smith J, Johnson L, Brown A: Gender Diversity in Corporate Governance: A Review of Trends and Strategies. J. Bus. Ethics. 2019; 154 (3): 689–704. Starr CR, Zurbriggen EL: Sandra Bem’s Gender Schema Theory After 34 Years: A Review of its Reach and Impact. Sex Roles. 2017; 76 (9-10): 566–578. Publisher Full Text Sundström A, Stockemer D, Wangnerud L: Women’s Representation in Local Governments: A Cross-National Comparison. Eur. J. Polit. Res. 2017; 56 (4): 735–759. Terjesen S, Aguilera RV, Lorenz R: Legislating a Woman’s Seat on the Board: Institutional Factors Driving Gender Quotas for Boards of Directors. J. Bus. Ethics. 2015; 128 (2): 233–251. Publisher Full Text Tripp AM: Seeking legitimacy: Why Arab autocracies adopt women’s rights. 2019;Cambridge University Press. Publisher Full Text True J, Parisi L: Navigating Gender Equality: Political Will, Institutional Change, and Social Norms. Global Pol. 2021; 12 (S4): 37–47. World Bank: Women, Business and the Law 2023. World Bank Publications; 2023. World Economic Forum: Global Gender Gap Report 2023. Geneva: World Economic Forum; 2023. Yang B, Subramanian N, Al Harthy S: Are gender diversity issues a hidden problem in logistics and supply chain management? Building research themes through a systematic literature review. J. Purch. Supply Manag. 2024; 30 : 100937. Publisher Full Text Yusoff ASM, Peng FS, Abd Razak FZ, et al. :Discriminant validity assessment of religious teacher acceptance: The use of HTMT criterion.J. Phys. Conf. Ser.2020; 1529 (4): 042045. IOP Publishing. Publisher Full Text Zaman R, Jain T, Samara G, et al. : Corporate governance meets corporate social responsibility: Mapping the interface. Bus. Soc. 2022; 61 (3): 690–752. Publisher Full Text Zhang L: An institutional approach to gender diversity and firm performance. Organ. Sci. 2020; 31 (2): 439–457. Publisher Full Text Zubeyr MA, Mohamud KM, Adnan KA: Organisational Governance and women’s participation of decision-making for non-governmental organisations in Somalia. Academic Research International. 2013; 4 : 430. Comments on this article Comments (0) Version 1 VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 20 Oct 2025 ADD YOUR COMMENT Comment Author details Author details 1 Transport and Logistics Management, MAKERERE UNIVERSITY BUSINESS SCHOOL, Kampala, Kampala, Uganda 2 Procurement and supply chain management, Makerere University Business School, Kampala, Central Region, Uganda 3 Graduate research, UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AFRICA, Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa Nabiira Nantongo Roles: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Funding Acquisition, Methodology, Software, Writing – Original Draft Preparation, Writing – Review & Editing Joseph Ntayi Roles: Supervision, Writing – Review & Editing Sheila Namagembe Roles: Supervision, Writing – Review & Editing Marcia Mkansi Roles: Supervision, Writing – Review & Editing Competing interests No competing interests were disclosed. Grant information The author(s) declared that no grants were involved in supporting this work. Article Versions (1) version 1 Published: 20 Oct 2025, 14:1139 https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.171481.1 Copyright © 2025 Nantongo N et al . This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Download Export To Sciwheel Bibtex EndNote ProCite Ref. Manager (RIS) Sente metrics Views Downloads F1000Research - - PubMed Central info_outline Data from PMC are received and updated monthly. - - Citations open_in_new 0 open_in_new 0 open_in_new SEE MORE DETAILS CITE how to cite this article Nantongo N, Ntayi J, Namagembe S and Mkansi M. Assessing the Impact of Social Culture and National Regulations on Women’s Engagement in Logistics Decision-Making in Uganda [version 1; peer review: awaiting peer review] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :1139 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.171481.1 ) NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS track receive updates on this article Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article. TRACK THIS ARTICLE Share Open Peer Review Current Reviewer Status: AWAITING PEER REVIEW AWAITING PEER REVIEW ? Key to Reviewer Statuses VIEW HIDE Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Comments on this article Comments (0) Version 1 VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 20 Oct 2025 ADD YOUR COMMENT Comment keyboard_arrow_left keyboard_arrow_right Open Peer Review Reviewer Status AWAITING PEER REVIEW Comments on this article All Comments (0) Add a comment Sign up for content alerts Sign Up You are now signed up to receive this alert Browse by related subjects Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved - the paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations - A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved - fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Adjust parameters to alter display View on desktop for interactive features Includes Interactive Elements View on desktop for interactive features Competing Interests Policy Provide sufficient details of any financial or non-financial competing interests to enable users to assess whether your comments might lead a reasonable person to question your impartiality. Consider the following examples, but note that this is not an exhaustive list: Examples of 'Non-Financial Competing Interests' Within the past 4 years, you have held joint grants, published or collaborated with any of the authors of the selected paper. You have a close personal relationship (e.g. parent, spouse, sibling, or domestic partner) with any of the authors. You are a close professional associate of any of the authors (e.g. scientific mentor, recent student). You work at the same institute as any of the authors. You hope/expect to benefit (e.g. favour or employment) as a result of your submission. You are an Editor for the journal in which the article is published. Examples of 'Financial Competing Interests' You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, any of the following from any commercial organisation that may gain financially from your submission: a salary, fees, funding, reimbursements. You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, shared grant support or other funding with any of the authors. You hold, or are currently applying for, any patents or significant stocks/shares relating to the subject matter of the paper you are commenting on. Stay Updated Sign up for content alerts and receive a weekly or monthly email with all newly published articles Register with F1000Research Already registered? Sign in Not now, thanks close PLEASE NOTE If you are an AUTHOR of this article, please check that you signed in with the account associated with this article otherwise we cannot automatically identify your role as an author and your comment will be labelled as a “User Comment”. If you are a REVIEWER of this article, please check that you have signed in with the account associated with this article and then go to your account to submit your report, please do not post your review here. If you do not have access to your original account, please contact us . All commenters must hold a formal affiliation as per our Policies . The information that you give us will be displayed next to your comment. User comments must be in English, comprehensible and relevant to the article under discussion. We reserve the right to remove any comments that we consider to be inappropriate, offensive or otherwise in breach of the User Comment Terms and Conditions . Commenters must not use a comment for personal attacks. When criticisms of the article are based on unpublished data, the data should be made available. I accept the User Comment Terms and Conditions Please confirm that you accept the User Comment Terms and Conditions. Affiliation ✕ refresh Please enter your institution. Note: To add your institution or organisation, start typing the name and then select the correct name from the list. Where applicable, the name will appear in both the original language and in English. Do not paste in the name. If the name does not appear in the drop-down list, we will display the information you have entered. ✕ refresh Country/Region * USA UK Canada China France Germany Afghanistan Aland Islands Albania Algeria American Samoa Andorra Angola Anguilla Antarctica Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Bouvet Island Brazil British Indian Ocean Territory British Virgin Islands Brunei Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Chile China Christmas Island Cocos (Keeling) Islands Colombia Comoros Congo Cook Islands Costa Rica Cote d'Ivoire Croatia Cuba Cyprus Czech Republic Democratic Republic of the Congo Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Falkland Islands Faroe Islands Federated States of Micronesia Fiji Finland France French Guiana French Polynesia French Southern Territories Gabon Georgia Germany Ghana Gibraltar Greece Greenland Grenada Guadeloupe Guam Guatemala Guernsey Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Heard Island and Mcdonald Islands Holy See (Vatican City State) Honduras Hong Kong Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jersey Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Kosovo (Serbia and Montenegro) Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Lao People's Democratic Republic Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macao Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Marshall Islands Martinique Mauritania Mauritius Mayotte Mexico Minor Outlying Islands of the United States Moldova Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Montserrat Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands Antilles New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Niue Norfolk Island North Korea North Macedonia Northern Mariana Islands Norway Oman Pakistan Palau Palestinian Territory Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Pitcairn Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar Reunion Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saint Helena Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Pierre and Miquelon Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Samoa San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa South Georgia and the South Sandwich Is South Korea South Sudan Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Svalbard and Jan Mayen Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syria Taiwan Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand The Gambia The Netherlands Timor-Leste Togo Tokelau Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu UK USA Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United States Virgin Islands Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela Vietnam Wallis and Futuna West Bank and Gaza Strip Western Sahara Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe Please select your country/region. You must enter a comment. Competing Interests Please disclose any competing interests that might be construed to influence your judgment of the article's or peer review report's validity or importance. Competing Interests Policy Provide sufficient details of any financial or non-financial competing interests to enable users to assess whether your comments might lead a reasonable person to question your impartiality. Consider the following examples, but note that this is not an exhaustive list: Examples of 'Non-Financial Competing Interests' Within the past 4 years, you have held joint grants, published or collaborated with any of the authors of the selected paper. You have a close personal relationship (e.g. parent, spouse, sibling, or domestic partner) with any of the authors. You are a close professional associate of any of the authors (e.g. scientific mentor, recent student). You work at the same institute as any of the authors. You hope/expect to benefit (e.g. favour or employment) as a result of your submission. You are an Editor for the journal in which the article is published. Examples of 'Financial Competing Interests' You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, any of the following from any commercial organisation that may gain financially from your submission: a salary, fees, funding, reimbursements. You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, shared grant support or other funding with any of the authors. You hold, or are currently applying for, any patents or significant stocks/shares relating to the subject matter of the paper you are commenting on. Please state your competing interests The comment has been saved. An error has occurred. Please try again. Cancel Post var lTitle = "Assessing the Impact of Social Culture and...".replace("'", ''); var linkedInUrl = "http://www.linkedin.com/shareArticle?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/14-1139/v1" + "&title=" + encodeURIComponent(lTitle) + "&summary=" + encodeURIComponent('Read the article by '); var deliciousUrl = "https://del.icio.us/post?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/14-1139/v1&title=" + encodeURIComponent(lTitle); var redditUrl = "http://reddit.com/submit?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/14-1139/v1" + "&title=" + encodeURIComponent(lTitle); linkedInUrl += encodeURIComponent('Nantongo N et al.'); var offsetTop = /chrome/i.test( navigator.userAgent ) ? 4 : -10; var addthis_config = { ui_offset_top: offsetTop, services_compact : "facebook,twitter,www.linkedin.com,www.mendeley.com,reddit.com", services_expanded : "facebook,twitter,www.linkedin.com,www.mendeley.com,reddit.com", services_custom : [ { name: "LinkedIn", url: linkedInUrl, icon:"/img/icon/at_linkedin.svg" }, { name: "Mendeley", url: "http://www.mendeley.com/import/?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/14-1139/v1/mendeley", icon:"/img/icon/at_mendeley.svg" }, { name: "Reddit", url: redditUrl, icon:"/img/icon/at_reddit.svg" }, ] }; var addthis_share = { url: "https://f1000research.com/articles/14-1139", templates : { twitter : "Assessing the Impact of Social Culture and National Regulations.... Nantongo N et al., published by " + "@F1000Research" + ", https://f1000research.com/articles/14-1139/v1" } }; if (typeof(addthis) != "undefined"){ addthis.addEventListener('addthis.ready', checkCount); addthis.addEventListener('addthis.menu.share', checkCount); } $(".f1r-shares-twitter").attr("href", "https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=" + addthis_share.templates.twitter); $(".f1r-shares-facebook").attr("href", "https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=" + addthis_share.url); $(".f1r-shares-linkedin").attr("href", addthis_config.services_custom[0].url); $(".f1r-shares-reddit").attr("href", addthis_config.services_custom[2].url); $(".f1r-shares-mendelay").attr("href", addthis_config.services_custom[1].url); function checkCount(){ setTimeout(function(){ $(".addthis_button_expanded").each(function(){ var count = $(this).text(); if (count !== "" && count != "0") $(this).removeClass("is-hidden"); else $(this).addClass("is-hidden"); }); }, 1000); } close How to cite this report {{reportCitation}} Cancel Copy Citation Details $(function(){R.ui.buttonDropdowns('.dropdown-for-downloads');}); $(function(){R.ui.toolbarDropdowns('.toolbar-dropdown-for-downloads');}); $.get("/articles/acj/171481/189092") new F1000.Clipboard(); new F1000.ThesaurusTermsDisplay("articles", "article", "189092"); $(document).ready(function() { $( "#frame1" ).on('load', function() { var mydiv = $(this).contents().find("div"); var h = mydiv.height(); console.log(h) }); var tooltipLivingFigure = jQuery(".interactive-living-figure-label .icon-more-info"), titleLivingFigure = tooltipLivingFigure.attr("title"); tooltipLivingFigure.simpletip({ fixed: true, position: ["-115", "30"], baseClass: 'small-tooltip', content:titleLivingFigure + " " }); tooltipLivingFigure.removeAttr("title"); $("body").on("click", ".cite-living-figure", function(e) { e.preventDefault(); var ref = $(this).attr("data-ref"); $(this).closest(".living-figure-list-container").find("#" + ref).fadeIn(200); }); $("body").on("click", ".close-cite-living-figure", function(e) { e.preventDefault(); $(this).closest(".popup-window-wrapper").fadeOut(200); }); $(document).on("mouseup", function(e) { var metricsContainer = $(".article-metrics-popover-wrapper"); if (!metricsContainer.is(e.target) && metricsContainer.has(e.target).length === 0) { $(".article-metrics-close-button").click(); } }); var articleId = $('#articleId').val(); if($("#main-article-count-box").attachArticleMetrics) { $("#main-article-count-box").attachArticleMetrics(articleId, { articleMetricsView: true }); } }); var figshareWidget = $(".new_figshare_widget"); if (figshareWidget.length > 0) { window.figshare.load("f1000", function(Widget) { // Select a tag/tags defined in your page. In this tag we will place the widget. _.map(figshareWidget, function(el){ var widget = new Widget({ articleId: $(el).attr("figshare_articleId") //height:300 // this is the height of the viewer part. [Default: 550] }); widget.initialize(); // initialize the widget widget.mount(el); // mount it in a tag that's on your page // this will save the widget on the global scope for later use from // your JS scripts. This line is optional. //window.widget = widget; }); }); } close Error Close Add Reset F1000.MICROSERVICES.AFFILIATION = ''; $(document).ready(function () { $('.js-affiliations-form').each((index, form) => { new AffiliationForm({ formId: form.id, institutionErrorSelector: '.comment-enter-institution', departmentErrorSelector: '.comment-enter-department', placeSelector: '.js-add-comment-place', stateSelector: '.js-add-comment-state', zipCodeSelector: '.js-add-comment-zipcode', countrySelector: '.js-add-comment-country', countryErrorSelector: '.comment-enter-country', }); }); }); $(document).ready(function () { var reportIds = { "437014": 0, "437015": 0, "437012": 0, "437013": 0, "437010": 0, "437011": 0, "437008": 0, "437009": 0, "437016": 0, "437017": 0, "444198": 0, "444199": 0, "444196": 0, "444197": 0, "444194": 0, "444195": 0, "444193": 0, "444202": 0, "444200": 0, "444201": 0, "425782": 0, "425783": 0, "425780": 0, "425781": 0, "425779": 0, "425788": 0, "425786": 0, "425787": 0, "425784": 0, "425785": 0, "438854": 0, "427974": 0, "438855": 0, "427975": 0, "438862": 0, "427982": 0, "438863": 0, "427983": 0, "438860": 0, "427980": 0, "438861": 0, "427981": 0, "438858": 0, "427978": 0, "438859": 0, "427979": 0, "438856": 0, "427976": 0, "427977": 0, "438857": 0, }; $(".referee-response-container,.js-referee-report").each(function(index, el) { var reportId = $(el).attr("data-reportid"), reportCount = reportIds[reportId] || 0; $(el).find(".comments-count-container,.js-referee-report-views").html(reportCount); }); var uuidInput = $("#article_uuid"), oldUUId = uuidInput.val(), newUUId = "4545ad7e-458b-47f6-973c-5fb1d9a968d6"; uuidInput.val(newUUId); $("a[href*='article_uuid=']").each(function(index, el) { var newHref = $(el).attr("href").replace(oldUUId, newUUId); $(el).attr("href", newHref); }); }); An innovative open access publishing platform offering rapid publication and open peer review, whilst supporting data deposition and sharing. Browse Gateways Collections How it Works Contact For Developers Cookie Notice Privacy Notice RSS Submit Your Research Follow us © 2012-2026 F1000 Research Ltd. ISSN 2046-1402 | Legal | Partner of Research4Life • CrossRef • ORCID • FAIRSharing R.templateTests.simpleTemplate = R.template(' $text $text $text $text $text '); R.templateTests.runTests(); var F1000platform = new F1000.Platform({ name: "f1000research", displayName: "F1000Research", hostName: "f1000research.com", id: "1", editorialEmail: "[email protected]", infoEmail: "[email protected]", usePmcStats: true }); $(function(){R.ui.dropdowns('.dropdown-for-authors, .dropdown-for-about, .dropdown-for-myresearch');}); // $(function(){R.ui.dropdowns('.dropdown-for-referees');}); $(document).ready(function () { if ($(".cookie-warning").is(":visible")) { $(".sticky").css("margin-bottom", "35px"); $(".devices").addClass("devices-and-cookie-warning"); } $(".cookie-warning .close-button").click(function (e) { $(".devices").removeClass("devices-and-cookie-warning"); $(".sticky").css("margin-bottom", "0"); }); $("#tweeter-feed .tweet-message").each(function (i, message) { var self = $(message); self.html(linkify(self.html())); }); $(".partner").on("mouseenter mouseleave", function() { $(this).find(".gray-scale, .colour").toggleClass("is-hidden"); }); }); Sign In Remember me Forgotten your password? Sign In Cancel Email or password not correct. Please try again Please wait... $(function(){ // Note: All the setup needs to run against a name attribute and *not* the id due the clonish // nature of facebox... $("a[id=googleSignInButton]").click(function(event){ event.preventDefault(); $("input[id=oAuthSystem]").val("GOOGLE"); $("form[id=oAuthForm]").submit(); }); $("a[id=facebookSignInButton]").click(function(event){ event.preventDefault(); $("input[id=oAuthSystem]").val("FACEBOOK"); $("form[id=oAuthForm]").submit(); }); $("a[id=orcidSignInButton]").click(function(event){ event.preventDefault(); $("input[id=oAuthSystem]").val("ORCID"); $("form[id=oAuthForm]").submit(); }); }); If you've forgotten your password, please enter your email address below and we'll send you instructions on how to reset your password. The email address should be the one you originally registered with F1000. Email address not valid, please try again You registered with F1000 via Google, so we cannot reset your password. To sign in, please click here . If you still need help with your Google account password, please click here . You registered with F1000 via Facebook, so we cannot reset your password. To sign in, please click here . If you still need help with your Facebook account password, please click here . Code not correct, please try again Reset password Cancel Email us for further assistance. Server error, please try again. If your email address is registered with us, we will email you instructions to reset your password. If you think you should have received this email but it has not arrived, please check your spam filters and/or contact for further assistance. Please wait... Register $(document).ready(function () { signIn.createSignInAsRow($("#sign-in-form-gfb-popup")); $(".target-field").each(function () { var uris = $(this).val().split("/"); if (uris.pop() === "login") { $(this).val(uris.toString().replace(",","/")); } }); });