Justice, health, and healthcare

Healthcare (including public health) is special because it protects normal functioning, which in turn protects the range of opportunities open to individuals. I extend this account in two ways. First, since the distribution of goods other than healthcare affect population health and its distribution, I claim that Rawls's principles of justice describe a fair distribution of the social determinants of health, giving a partial account of when health inequalities are unjust. Second, I supplement a principled account of justice for health and healthcare with an account of fair process for setting limits of rationing care. This account is provided by three conditions that comprise "accountability for reasonableness."     

Justice,Health, and Healthcare

Healthcare (including public health) is special because it protects normal functioning, which in turn protects the range of opportunities open to individuals. I extend this account in two ways. First, since the distribution of goods other than healthcare affect population health and its distribution, I claim that Rawls's principles of justice describe a fair distribution of the social determinants of health, giving a partial account of when health inequalities are unjust. Second, I supplement a principled account of justice for health and healthcare with an account of fair process for setting limits or rationing care. This account is provided by three conditions that comprise "accountability for reasonableness."     

愉快的人更易体验公正？——员工的情绪特质对组织公正感的影响研究

摘要：情绪和公正感之间的关系一直以来颇受研究者的关注。本研究通过对260名组织员工的取样调查,探讨了情绪特质对各层面组织公正感的影响。相关分析及多元调节回归分析结果表明：积极情绪特质（TPA） 对公正感存在显著的主效应,消极情绪特质（TNA）则与工作环境特征形成交互作用,共同影响对组织（或主管）实体的公正感。文章也讨论了这一研究结论对现实管理的意义。关键词：积极情绪特质 消极情绪特质 组织公正感     

公正判断中的“非理性”：加工特征、主要表现和影响因素

公正判断中的“非理性”研究是社会认知双过程加工理论在公正领域的拓展, 也是不确定性管理和道德心理研究的延续。就加工过程而言, 个体的公正判断可能同时依存“理性”和“非理性”两个结构和进化都不同的认知体系。置换过程、首因效应、极端判断、补偿偏见、责备无辜受害者和道德命令效应是公正判断中“非理性”的主要表现。自我因素、公正敏感性、道德认同、情绪状态和公正世界信念等个体变量是其主要影响因素。综合来看, 目前公正判断的“非理性”研究还比较庞杂, 其进化根源、生理机制、如何与理性过程交互作用等还有待深入研究。此外, 结合社会现实问题、关注第三方视角、多理论解释的整合及多水平因素的交互影响可能是未来的研究方向。     

不确定性、情绪对公正判断的影响

本研究以不确定管理模型为理论来源,采用实验法探讨了公正判断中的情绪效应。实验1采用2（两种情绪状态：愉快/愤怒）×4（四种结果：比自己多/一样多/比自己少/不知道）被试间设计。实验2采用2（两种情绪状态：愉快/愤怒）×3（三种程序：有发言权/外显无发言权/无发言权信息）被试间设计。分别考察了分配公正与程序公正判断中的情绪影响。结果发现：不确定性调节了情绪与公平判断之间的关系。当用于公平判断的外部信息不明确时,情绪充当了公平判断的线索。     

从归因视角探讨组织公正感产生机制

目前组织公正感研究的重点是组织公正与后续行为之间的关系,但某一特定事件的公平/不公平感产生的过程却未得到实验检验.本研究旨在将归因理论的观点和方法纳入到公正判断之中,从归因的视角探讨组织公正感的产生机制.研究结果表明,归因过程是公平判断的认知前提,对公平判断有显著的预测作用.     

Toward a better understanding of the justice judgment process: The influence of fair and unfair events on state justice sensitivity

People differ in the way they regard justice. Although some people may be relatively unaffected by justice issues, many others regard justice as a very important concept and react to it accordingly. Prior research suggests that this sensitivity to justice is a stable personality trait. In three studies, we show that (compared to neutral events) experiencing just and unjust events (directed toward the self or others) can elevate state levels of justice sensitivity. We discuss the implications of these findings, including the notion how these results can lead to a better understanding of the justice judgment process. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

程序公正及其心理机制

程序公正是组织公正的重要成分。自从Thibaut和Walker（1975）提出程序公正的概念以后,程序公正被引入了很多领域的研究,得到了极大的发展,但是程序公正的内容需要整合统一。发言权效应和尊重效应讨论了影响程序公正判断的因素,个人利益模型和团体价值模型则分析了其内在的心理机制。程序公正影响了大量与工作有关的态度和行为,并与分配结果产生了交互作用,其内在机制也在文章中得到了讨论。     

Measured fairness, situated justice: feminist reflections on health care rationing

Bioethical discussion of justice in health care has been much enlivened in recent years by new developments in the theory of rationing and by the emergence of a strong communitarian voice. Unfortunately, these developments have not enjoyed much in the way of close engagement with feminist-inspired reflections on power, privilege, and justice. I hope here to promote interchange between "mainstream" treatments of justice in health care and feminist thought.     

A Rejection Threshold in Justice Evaluations: Effects on Judgment and Decision-Making

This research examined the process through which justice evaluations are formed. Using image theory's screening process we hypothesized that a rejection threshold exists with regard to violations of just treatment (e.g., laying off an employee without notice). If the number of violations exceeds the decision-maker's threshold, a negative justice evaluation results. Nonviolations (e.g., providing laid-off employees with a generous severance package) were hypothesized to only influence justice evaluations when violations do not exceed the threshold. Three studies compared the impact of justice violations and nonviolations on fairness evaluations. We also examined differences in fairness evaluations operationalized as judgments vs decisions. Results indicated that when makingjudgmentsabout fairness, both violations and nonviolations are equally important. However, when one has todecideon a course of action based on considerations of fairness, nonviolations are only considered if fewer than three violations have been encountered. These results identify important distinctions between judgment and decisions and have implication for research examining outcomes of justice evaluations.     

基于贡献原则的幼儿分配公平性

分配公平性是指个体如何以公平的方式对资源进行分配, 其主要依据3个原则：贡献(equity)、平等(equality)和需要(need)。最新研究表明, 幼儿很早就已经具有基于贡献原则的分配公平性判断与行为, 双加工理论对于该研究结果能够给出更为适当的解释, 心理理论与情境卷入水平分别从认知和情绪方面对幼儿分配公平性的发展有着重要影响。未来研究应注重研究内容的具体化, 对幼儿基于贡献原则的分配公平性发展特点、相关影响因素及其内部动机进行深入探究。     

Jewish and Roman Catholic approaches to access to health care and rationing

In addressing issues of access to health care and rationing, Jewish and Roman Catholic writers identify similar guiding values and specific concerns. Moral thinkers in each tradition tend to support the guarantee of universal access to at least a basic level of health care for all members of society, based on such values as human dignity, justice, and healing. Catholic writers are more likely to frame their arguments in terms of the common good and to be more accepting of rationing that denies beneficial and needed health care to some persons. Jewish writers are more likely to consider individual responsibility for illness in allocation decisions and to accept differences in health care that different members of society receive. The article considers the relevance of both shared and complementary perspectives for deliberations in nations such as the United States.     

Repentance Rituals and Restorative Justice

For most of this century, debate over how criminal justice should be transacted has alternated between an emphasis on retribution versus rehabilitation. Restoration has emerged in the 1990s as a credible third alternative. The most influential definition of restorative justice is by Tony Marshall in the context of a Delphi process conducted by Paul McCold: 'Restorative justice is a process whereby all the parties with a stake in a particular offence come together to resolve collectively how to deal with the aftermath of the offence and its implications for the future'. Restorative justice means restoring victims, restoring offenders and restoring communities. Among the losses victims, offenders or communities might want restored are property loss, injury, a sense of security, dignity, a sense of empowerment, voice, harmony based on a feeling that justice has been done, and social support.     

The Significance of the Concept of Disease for Justice in Health Care

In this paper, I want to scrutinise the value of utilising the concept of disease for a theory of distributive justice in health care. Although many people believe that the presence of a disease-related condition is a prerequisite of a justified claim on health care resources, the impact of the philosophical debate on the concept of disease is still relatively minor. This is surprising, because how we conceive of disease determines the amount of justified claims on health care resources. Therefore, the severity of scarcity depends on our interpretation of the concept of disease. I want to defend a specific combination of a theory of disease with a theory of distributive justice. A naturalist account of disease, together with sufficientarianism, is able to perform a gate-keeping function regarding entitlements to medical treatment. Although this combination cannot solve all problems of justice in health care, it may inform rationing decisions as well.     

A Theory of Providence for Distributive Justice

Distributive justice assumes a morally critical judgment of nature, which typically contradicts providential conceptions. Hence, simple conceptions of divine Providence cannot support distributive justice. This essay analyzes and develops a complex strand of theorizing about Providence within Jewish philosophy that is compatible with distributive justice. According to this conception, the actions of divine Providence express different and mutually exclusive considerations of justice. Therefore, the moral value of outcomes is intransitive between the situations of different people. And while each providential action is justified from an ethical perspective, the total outcome is distinct from God's ultimate desire. Human ethics responds to this disparity by redistribution. This conception of Providence also contributes to the additional issue of intergenerational justice through the concomitant idea of life missions. The classical rendering of missions creates problems, however, for distributive justice. I conclude by formulating a conception of life missions that is compatible with both distributive and intergenerational justice.     

Apology in the criminal justice setting: evidence for including apology as an additional component in the legal system

The criminal justice system has reached unprecedented scope in the United States, with over 6.4 million people under some type of supervision. Remedies that have the potential to reduce this number are continually being sought. This article analyzes an innovative strategy currently being reconsidered in criminal justice: the apology. Despite a legal system that only sporadically acknowledges it, evidence for the use of apology is supported by social science research, current criminal justice theories, case law, and empirical studies. Social psychological, sociological and socio-legal studies pinpoint the elements and function of apology, what makes apologies effective, and concerns about apology if it were implemented in the criminal justice system. Theoretical evidence is examined (including restorative justice, therapeutic jurisprudence, crime, shame, and reintegration) to explore the process of apology in the criminal justice context. Attribution theory and social conduct theory are used to explain the apology process specifically for victims and offenders. A brief examination of case law reveals that though apology has no formal place in criminal law, it has surfaced recently under the federal sentencing guidelines. Finally, empirical evidence in criminal justice settings reveals that offenders want to apologize and victims desire an apology. Moreover, by directly addressing the harmful act, apology may be the link to reduced recidivism for offenders, as well as empowerment for victims. This evidence combined suggests that apology is worthy of further study as a potentially valuable addition to the criminal justice process.     

Judgment in Fiction

Abstract

In this paper, I show that in order to gain an understanding of the facts about fiction it is more fruitful to pursue an analysis of judgment in fiction than an analysis of truth in fiction. I do so in two steps. First I take the analyses of truth in fiction which David Lewis provides in “Truth in Fiction”, which are formulated in terms of possible worlds, and provide counterpart analyses of judgment in fiction, formulated in terms of (mental) models and rules for the construction of (mental) models. In the course of discussion I identify various problems for Lewis’s account of truth in fiction and solve or dissolve them using the account of judgment in fiction. Second, I show that once we have an analysis of judgment which appeals to rules, we can extend the account of judgment by using Lewis’s account of accommodation and resistance in “Scorekeeping in a Language Game” to explain the evolution of the genres of fiction, construed as systems of rules. The result is to provide a dynamic account of judgment which does justice to modern poststructuralist observations in the philosophy of literature.     

Higher order sequential effects in psychophysical judgments

We found that the depth of sequential effects depends on the judgment task. An experiment with squares indicated that stimulus-response pairs up to two trials back were included in the judgment process when subjects were required to make category judgments of size, whereas only the immediately preceding event was incorporated when subjects were making magnitude estimations. In the case of category judgment, interactions between the current stimulus and prior stimuli as well as configural effects indicated that events one and two trials back meet an equivalent function in the judgment process and that these events may jointly operate in one trial. These findings can be explained by a class of models that assume that the position of preceding stimuli relative to the current stimulus is decisive in the judgment process. The multiple-standards model is a representative of this class according to which there are two types of standards: (1) the endpoints of the range as long-term standards and (2) traces of preceding stimuli as short-term standards.