Social Representations of Human Rights Amongst Czech University Students

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is a general legislative framework for democratic societies. Studying the social representations of these basic human rights helps to explain how people understand and assess the basic rights and how these rights relate to everyday life. Over 400 Czech university students rated the 30 articles of the Declaration of Human Rights on various scales (degree of understanding, personal relevance, consequences for individual responsibility, for government, political parties, etc.). A semantic space was identified in which concepts (i.e. the Articles of the Declaration) could be located. A typology (clusters) of articles was then established within that semantic space. A factor analysis of the scales resulted in a two-dimensional solution (‘positive attitude’ and ‘personal influence’). Five clusters of assessed articles were identified within this semantic space. (© 1997 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)     

Culture in the context of intercultural negotiation.

This study explores culture's effect on behaviors and outcomes in intercultural negotiation and examines how those effects are moderated by role. Eighty U.S. and international students took part in a previously developed negotiation task (Pruitt, 1981) and completed Hui and Triandis's (1986) individualism‐collectivism (INDCOL) scale. Negotiation interactions were coded for information sharing, offers, and distributive tactics. Findings show that a negotiation dyad's collectivism is positively associated with higher joint profit. The effects of culture on both communication behaviors and joint outcomes, however, differ by role of the negotiator. In particular, seller collectivism has larger and more consistent effects on communication behavior and joint profit than buyer collectivism. Results support a ‘culture in context’ perspective of negotiation that takes into account negotiator qualities, contextual and structural features of the negotiation, and mediating processes in addition to cultural values.     

ON THE PRAGMATICS OF SOCIAL THEORY: THE CASE OF ELIAS'S “ON THE PROCESS OF CIVILIZATION”

This paper proposes a new approach to the study of sociological classics. This approach is pragmatic in character. It draws upon the social pragmatism of G. H. Mead and the sociology of texts of D. F. McKenzie. Our object of study is Norbert Elias's On the Process of Civilization. The pragmatic genealogy of this book reveals the importance of taking materiality seriously. By documenting the successive entanglements between human agency and nonhuman factors, we discuss the origins of the book in the 1930s, how it was forgotten for 30 years, and how in the mid‐1970s it became a sociological classic. We explain canonization as a matter of fusion between book's material form and its content, in the context of the paperback revolution of the 1960s, the events of May 1968, and the demise of Parsons’ structural functionalism, and how this provided Elias with an opportunity to advance his model of sociology.     

Depressive symptoms enhance loss-minimization, but attenuate gain-maximization in history-dependent decision-making

Individuals with depressive symptoms typically show deficits in decision-making. However, most work has emphasized decision-making under gain-maximization conditions. A gain-maximization framework may undermine decision-making when depressive symptoms are present because depressives are generally more sensitive to losses than gains. The present study examined decision making in a non-clinical sample of depressive and non-depressive individuals under gain-maximization or loss-minimization conditions using a task for which the currently available rewards depend upon participants' previous history of choices. As predicted, we found a cross over interaction whereby depressive individuals were superior to non-depressive individuals under loss-minimization conditions, but were inferior to non-depressive individuals under gain-maximization conditions. In addition, we found that loss-minimization performance was superior to gain-maximization performance for depressive individuals, but that gain-maximization performance was superior to loss-minimization performance for non-depressive individuals. These results suggest that decision making deficits observed when depressive symptoms are present may be attenuated when decisions involve minimizing losses rather than maximizing gains.     

患者知情同意权实现的伦理思考与法律保护

随着医学科学的发展,患者的知情同意已是医学实践的一个基本伦理观念和原则,但是,它的实现不仅需要道德规范的约束,而且还需要法律的保护.     

Choking and excelling under pressure

Decrements in performance on cognitive tasks resulting from pressure to perform (i.e., choking) are thought to be caused by interference with the ability to use explicit strategies (the distraction theory). This view suggests that pressure should improve performance on tasks for which explicit strategies hamper performance. This hypothesis was tested by giving subjects one of two nearly identical learning tasks, a task that required learning a rule or one that required using a holistic information-integration strategy. Explicit rule use would hurt performance in the latter task. As predicted by the distraction theory, pressure decreased performance on the rule-based task but enhanced performance on the information-integration task.     

Training attention improves decision making in individuals with elevated self-reported depressive symptoms

Depression is often characterized by attentional biases toward negative items and away from positive items, which likely affects reward and punishment processing. Recent work has reported that training attention away from negative stimuli reduced this bias and reduced depressive symptoms. However, the effect of attention training on subsequent learning has yet to be explored. In the present study, participants were required to learn to maximize reward during decision making. Undergraduates with elevated self-reported depressive symptoms received attention training toward positive stimuli prior to performing the decision-making task (n = 20; active training). The active-training group was compared to two other groups: undergraduates with elevated self-reported depressive symptoms who received placebo training (n = 22; placebo training) and a control group with low levels of depressive symptoms (n = 33; nondepressive control). The placebo-training depressive group performed worse and switched between options more than did the nondepressive controls on the reward maximization task. However, depressives that received active training performed as well as the nondepressive controls. Computational modeling indicated that the placebo-trained group learned more from negative than from positive prediction errors, leading to more frequent switching. The nondepressive control and active-training depressive groups showed similar learning from positive and negative prediction errors, leading to less-frequent switching and better performance. Our results indicate that individuals with elevated depressive symptoms are impaired at reward maximization, but that the deficit can be improved with attention training toward positive stimuli.     

Self‐Control Moderates Decision‐Making Behavior When Minimizing Losses versus Maximizing Gains

We examined (1) whether people would be more responsive to the delayed consequences of their decisions when attempting to minimize losses than when attempting to maximize gains in a history‐dependent decision‐making task and (2) how trait self‐control would moderate such an effect. In two experiments, participants performed a dynamic decision‐making task where they chose one of two options on each trial. The increasing option always gave a smaller immediate reward but caused future rewards for both options to increase. The decreasing option always gave a larger immediate reward but caused future rewards for both options to decrease. In Experiment 1 where the two options had equivalent expected value in the long run, participants were more prone to select the increasing option, which yielded larger benefits on future trials, in the loss‐minimization condition than in the gain‐maximization condition. Trait self‐control moderated the effect of losses by enhancing the effect for low self‐control participants while attenuating it for high self‐control participants. In Experiment 2 where selecting the increasing option was suboptimal, low self‐control participants still attempted to reduce losses on future trials by selecting the increasing option more often than high self‐control participants. These results suggest that decision makers value delayed consequences of their actions more in a losses domain relative to a gains domain and low self‐control individuals are more susceptible to such an effect. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Do narcissists make better decisions? An investigation of narcissism and dynamic decision-making performance

We investigated whether narcissism affected dynamic decision-making performance in the presence and absence of misleading information. Performance was examined in a two-choice dynamic decision-making task where the optimal strategy was to forego an option providing larger immediate rewards in favor of an option that led to larger delayed rewards. Information regarding foregone rewards from the alternate option was presented or withheld to bias participants toward the sub-optimal choice. The results demonstrated that individuals high in narcissistic traits performed comparably to low narcissism individuals when foregone reward information was absent, but high narcissism individuals outperformed individuals low in narcissistic traits when misleading information was presented. The advantage for participants high in narcissistic traits was strongest within males, and, overall, males outperformed females when foregone rewards were present. While prior research emphasizes narcissists’ decision-making deficits, our findings provide evidence that individuals high in narcissistic traits excel at decision-making tasks that involve disregarding ambiguous information and focusing on the long-term utility of each option. Their superior ability at filtering out misleading information may reflect an effort to maintain their self-view or avoid ego threat.