Judgements of others’ emotional appropriateness are multidimensional

This study investigated the multidimensional structure of judgements of emotional appropriateness, the degree to which an observer judges a target's emotion to conform to observer-valued expectations for emotion in that context. Participants (N=169) were shown one of two brief video clips of an actor either showing anger or neutral expressions in an anger-evoking situation of either low, medium, or high severity. Participants rated the target's emotion on the Perception of Emotion Appropriateness Rating Scale (PEARS), which taps observers’ perceptions of a target's emotional appropriateness for a specific situation. We found that appropriateness ratings are comprised of three factors, assessment of Type Present (type of emotion in expression); Type Absent (missing key emotions); and Intensity (intensity with which the emotion is felt or expressed). Results are discussed in terms of the usefulness of a multidimensional conceptualisation of emotional appropriateness.     

Happiness: unlocking the mysteries of psychological wealth,by Ed Diener and Robert Biswas-Diener

No research to date has supported the ‘social contagion’ effect of laughter and smiles in a non-Western context, nor among children. Expressions of positive affect were here compared according to social and non-social conditions among 163 children between the ages of 5–12 while playing in a park in Afghanistan. Independent observers coded laugh and smile responses using published criteria and identified 147 laugh responses and 697 smile responses. Children in the social play condition demonstrated significantly more laughs than children in the non-social play condition, and the number of peer observers present in the social play condition significantly increased the number of participant smile responses, but not laugh responses. Findings supported the idea in Western research that laughter and smiles may function in moderating social relationships and communicating affect. The authors recommend future research to investigate the relationship between positive affect and well-being across cultures, with consideration for practical interventions.     

今本《周易》卦序排列数学规律新探

今本《周易》六十四卦卦序是依据什么道理排列出来的,迄今仍然没有一个完美的解答。本文尝试把卦序问题作为一个数学问题去考虑,探讨卦序的制作者所依据的数学思想与技巧。《六十四卦错综图》是我们研究序卦最重要的参考图,并指出十对三明三阳卦在序卦排列中起着骨架作用．无论是十对三明三阳卦,还是围绕这十对卦左右的其它卦,其排列在序数配置、卦区划分和爻画布排等诸多方面都蕴含着丰富的数学内容,充分反映了序卦的制作者运用数学技巧的娴熟技艺和精妙构想。     

科技伦理:在真与善之间

科技与伦理在实践中的内在关联,使科技伦理问题成为现代科技实践的重要方面。其中,科学活动的违规和失范现象,科技运行中的公正与效率问题,科技时代的生命安顿与伦理精神的创新,是当前在真与善之间特别为人们关注的问题。     

快速节俭启发式--基于有限理性和生态理性的简单决策规则

本文阐述了德国“马克斯．普朗克人类发展研究所”以Gerd Gigerenzer教授为代表的“适应行为与认知中心”简称“ABC研究中心(组)”关于判断、推理和决策制定简单启发式研究的理论背景、研究思路和技术路线,着重介绍了该研究中心在有限理性和生态理性假设基础上提出的一系列极富创意的快速节俭启发式规则,并对围绕这些简单决策规则开展的研究活动作了简要介绍。     

论宏观经济调控和管理中的若干伦理问题

宏观经济调控和管理中的伦理问题,是一个不可忽视的领域。中国是一个发展中国家,正处在从传统经济向现代市场经济转型,政府的宏观调控不可或缺;同时政府作为经济活动的主体,其行为也必须遵守适应市场经济运作的规则。     

Toward an Alliance Between the Issue-Processing Approach and Pragma-Dialectical Analysis

On the approach to discussions of policy choices that treats such discussions as instances of issue-processing, the joint use of the logic of questions and the logic of rules gives precise formulation to two sorts of issues. To one sort of issue belong issue-circumscribing questions; to another sort, issues-simplicter, which consist of disjunctions of policy proposals – so many proposed social rules – that are answers, in the case of each disjunction, to a given issue-circumscribing question. Work in pragma-dialectics can take over the issue-processing approach; and by doing so add to the pragma-dialectical repertory further dimensions in the analysis of issues and in protocol-narratives of discussion. The analysis and narratives would now include accounts of how issue-circumscribing questions generate initial standpoints and how discussions sometimes end with compromises between standpoints. Further research questions follow about transformations of issues and the comparison of successive rounds of discussion. A narrative of one period of discussion during `the War on Drugs' in the United States illustrates these points.     

The Brier Rule Is not a Good Measure of Epistemic Utility (and Other Useful Facts about Epistemic Betterness)

Measures of epistemic utility are used by formal epistemologists to make determinations of epistemic betterness among cognitive states. The Brier rule is the most popular choice (by far) among formal epistemologists for such a measure. In this paper, however, we show that the Brier rule is sometimes seriously wrong about whether one cognitive state is epistemically better than another. In particular, there are cases where an agent gets evidence that definitively eliminates a false hypothesis (and the probabilities assigned to the other hypotheses stay in the same ratios), but where the Brier rule says that things have become epistemically worse. Along the way to this ‘elimination experiment’ counter-example to the Brier rule as a measure of epistemic utility, we identify several useful monotonicity principles for epistemic betterness. We also reply to several potential objections to this counter-example.