Moral dilemmas and moral rules

Recent work shows an important asymmetry in lay intuitions about moral dilemmas. Most people think it is permissible to divert a train so that it will kill one innocent person instead of five, but most people think that it is not permissible to push a stranger in front of a train to save five innocents. We argue that recent emotion-based explanations of this asymmetry have neglected the contribution that rules make to reasoning about moral dilemmas. In two experiments, we find that participants show a parallel asymmetry about versions of the dilemmas that have minimized emotional force. In a third experiment, we find that people distinguish between whether an action violates a moral rule and whether it is, all things considered, wrong. We propose that judgments of whether an action is wrong, all things considered, implicate a complex set of psychological processes, including representations of rules, emotional responses, and assessments of costs and benefits.     

A Pragma-Dialectical Analysis of the Inquisition

Disagreement space consists of all the commitments and understandings required for an utterance to take on its discourse function. These are virtual standpoints that can be called out for explicit argumentation. This paper shows how the Inquisition systematically controlled disagreement space, preventing some apparently important standpoints from ever being argued about, and requiring attention to others that may not have initially seemed relevant. This control of disagreement space constituted violation of the rules for critical discussion. The essay suggests that the idea of disagreement space be slightly enlarged, to show the distinctions among virtual, possible, and actual disagreement spaces. The Inquisition's extra-argumentative power is what permitted its specification of the possible disagreement space. The analysis suggests that pragma-dialectics may have application in the criticism and analysis of social institutions.     

How to Regulate a Practice: The Case of Cosmetic Surgery

How should a practice, subservient to a public good, be regulated in order to guarantee fair access without encouraging improper claims? In the first place, a clear understanding of the goal of the practice is indispensable for knowing what criteria the regulation must contain. As to the purely formal aspect, the regulation of any practice must include both general rules and particular instances. Finally, to resolve conflicts, committees in which different kinds of expertise are represented should be installed. These three theses are illustrated by the Dutch regulation for cosmetic surgery.     

情绪性工作的研究现状

情绪性工作是为表达组织所期待的情绪所做出的心理调节加工,是制约工作绩效高低和组织目标达成的重要因素。该文在介绍情绪性工作的涵义、特征的基础上,从规则的效度、表达的类型、调节的策略、理论的模型以及工作的后效等方面,介绍了当前情绪性工作的研究现状。     

儿童对道义情景中的心理状态的推理

该文回顾了儿童对道义情景中心理状态推理的研究,包括儿童对行为者愿望、信念和情绪的推理以及对权威愿望的推理研究。总体来讲,道义规则的引入使得儿童过分根据道义规则来对行为者的行为和心理状态进行推理,但是不同的研究还存在诸多矛盾之处,这可能与以往的研究中所使用的道义规则属于不同的领域（如道德、习俗及防范等领域）以及实验任务（如行为预测和奖惩判断等）的差异有关。最后该文提出另外两个可能的影响因素：道义规则的形式和儿童的视角采择能力     

On the context dependence of emotion displays: Perceptions of gold medalists’ expressions of pride

In spite of various claims for cross-cultural differences in the experience of pride, studies on the expression of pride have revealed few cross-cultural differences. Five studies using archival data from Olympic and national championships do show cross-cultural differences in the expression of pride and other positive emotions in pride-eliciting contexts, contingent on the social context of the expression, notably the in-group or out-group status of the audience. Chinese gold medalists were perceived to express less pride than American medalists when outperforming in-group competitors; when outperforming out-group members, however, no or smaller cross-cultural differences were observed. These findings are important because they indicate that cultural norms about emotion expression may be activated only in situations in which they serve a function in coordinating people's behaviour.     

An examination of within-person variance in contextual display rules and deviation from display rules

Contextual display rules refer to perceptions of the particular emotions that should be displayed in a specific set of circumstances. As such, it is important to examine within-person variance in such perceptions within the dynamic context of real-life organizations. To this end, experience sampling methodology was used to highlight within-person variance in display rules and examine event-level predictors of these contextual display rules. Thirty-nine university staff members were surveyed four times per day about their most recent interaction. Employee momentary affect (pleasantness and activation) and relationship with the interaction target (solidarity and relative power) were examined as predictors of both contextual display rule perceptions and deviation from those display rules. Pleasantness of affect related positively to the level of expression allowed by the display rule, whereas activation of affect and target solidarity related positively to deviation from display rules. Complex interactions were also found between the predictors, further highlighting the complexity of the emotional labour process.