科技人员创造动机与创造力的研究

本研究初步探讨了我国科技人员创造动机与创造力的关系及其基本特征。 1 74名科技人员回答了成就目标、内部动机与外部动机、创造动机和创造力问卷。研究结果表明我国科技人员有较高的创造力和创造动机水平 ,在动机中内部动机水平最高。在动机与创造力的关系上 ,内部动机对创造力的直接与间接影响均达到了显著水平 ,外部动机对创造力的负面影响没有达到显著水平 ,任务目标对创造力无影响 ,自我目标对创造力的积极影响未达到显著水平。     

Consciousness as a concrete physical phenomenon

The typical empirical approach to studying consciousness holds that we can only observe the neural correlates of experiences, not the experiences themselves. In this paper we argue, in contrast, that experiences are concrete physical phenomena that can causally interact with other phenomena, including observers. Hence, experiences can be observed and scientifically modelled. We propose that the epistemic gap between an experience and a scientific model of its neural mechanisms stems from the fact that the model is merely a theoretical construct based on observations, and distinct from the concrete phenomenon it models, namely the experience itself. In this sense, there is a gap between any natural phenomenon and its scientific model. On this approach, a neuroscientific theory of the constitutive mechanisms of an experience is literally a model of the subjective experience itself. We argue that this metatheoretical framework provides a solid basis for the empirical study of consciousness.     

科学探究的认知机制研究述评

科学探究涉及一个复杂的认知过程，Klahr和Dunbar的SDDS模型、Kuhn的模型以及双过程模型对此过程进行了描述；另外研究者们还对科学探究过程不同阶段需要的认知技能和认知策略以及影响因素进行了研究。     

Recent Debates Over Structural Realism

Summary  In recent years Structural Realism has been revived as a compromise candidate to resolve the long-standing question of scientific realism. Recent debate over structural realism originates with Worrall’s (1989) paper “Structural Realism: The best of Both Worlds”. However, critics such as Psillos contend that structural realism incorporates an untenable distinction between structure and nature, and is therefore unworkable. In this paper I consider three versions of structural realism that purport to avoid such criticism. The first is Chakravartty’s “semirealism” which proceeds by trying to show that structural realism and entity realism entail one another. I demonstrate that this position will not work, but follow Chakravartty’s contention that structural realism need not imply that scientific knowledge can only be of mathematical structure. I advance from this conclusion to sketch a version of structural realism that is consistent with recent deflationary approaches to the scientific realism question. Finally, I consider a third approach to structural realism Ladyman’s “metaphysical structural realism” which tries to avoid the difficulties of earlier versions by taking structure to be ontologically primary. I show that the deflationary approach to structural realism undermines the rationale behind Ladyman’s approach.     

特需医疗服务需方特征及意向调查分析

为了解特需医疗服务需方的特征及其影响因素,挖掘特需医疗服务市场的发展潜力提示思路。以问卷调查、个别访谈定性研究为主,并综合运用了统计资料及数据库资料的提取与分析等多种研究方法。结果显示,特需医疗服务市场容量大,并且持续增长;特需医疗服务需方选择医院的主要依据是医疗技术水平、服务设施、环境和先进的设备;医疗质量不高在特需医疗服务市场中反映较为普遍。特需医疗服务市场潜力巨大,特需医疗服务的发展应以目标人群的需求为导向,实施个性化服务策略。     

Sport Philosophy Inquiry in 3D: A Pragmatic Response to the (Sport) Philosophy Paradox

A paradoxical attitude exists toward professional philosophy: philosophical inquiry is considered important and complex, but professionals are deemed irrelevant and unnecessary. This paradox doubly affects sport philosophy as evidenced by the field’s marginalization in higher education and sociopolitical discourse. To counter the sport philosophy paradox, I present a pragmatically oriented three-dimensional approach to inquiry that turns the field “inside-out”. A community of engaged, melioratively oriented sport philosophy inquirers in this 3D model collectively conducts theoretical (horizontal dimension), applied (vertical dimension), and instrumental (depth dimension) inquiry. Each dimension is outlined in detail from a professional sport philosophy perspective, and implications are considered relative to the field’s future endeavors.     

Non‐Scientific Criteria for Belief Sustain Counter‐Scientific Beliefs

Why is evolutionary theory controversial among members of the American public? We propose a novel explanation: allegiance to different criteria for belief. In one interview study, two online surveys, and one nationally representative phone poll, we found that evolutionists and creationists take different justifications for belief as legitimate. Those who accept evolution emphasize empirical evidence and scientific consensus. Creationists emphasize not only the Bible and religious authority, but also knowledge of the heart. These criteria for belief remain predictive of views about evolution even when taking into account other related factors like religion, political affiliation, and education. Each view is supported by its own internally specified criteria for what constitutes a justified belief. Changing minds may thus require changing epistemic norms.     

Using an Example Statement Increases Information but Does Not Increase Accuracy of CBCA,RM, and SCAN

Verbal credibility assessment methods are frequently used in the criminal justice system to investigate the truthfulness of statements. Three of these methods are Criteria Based Content Analysis (CBCA), Reality Monitoring (RM), and Scientific Content Analysis (SCAN). The aim of this study is twofold. First, we investigated the diagnostic accuracy of CBCA, RM, and especially SCAN. Second, we tested whether giving the interviewee an example of a detailed statement can enhance the diagnostic accuracy of these verbal credibility methods. To test the latter, two groups of participants were requested to write down one true and one fabricated statement about a negative event. Prior to this request, one group received a detailed example statement, whereas the other group received no additional information. Results showed that CBCA and RM scores differed between true and fabricated statements, whereas SCAN scores did not. Giving a detailed example statement did not lead to better discrimination between truth tellers and liars for any of the methods but did lead to the participants producing significantly longer statements. The implications of these findings are discussed. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Where to look for information when planning scientific research in Psychology: Sources and channels

It is imperative that researchers invest time in the planning of their research, and it is certainly essential to stop and seek information before making any kind of decision. The present work sets out to guide psychologists in this crucial task. To this end we begin by suggesting a visit to the APA website, where a great deal of relevant information on most topics can be found, whether it pertains to new and controversial issues or to those on which there is greater consensus. In this regard we shall consider at length the meanings of the expressions “evidence-based practice” and “scientific evidence” and their inherent methodological aspects, from “scientific evidence” contributed by systematic reviews to the way it can be obtained using handbooks and guidelines of inestimable value for the successful completion of our research. All such resources will help researchers to set out their hypotheses correctly, to test them adequately and to analyze the data in the most appropriate and rigorous fashion. In this way, the quality of the research will undoubtedly improve.     

Sexuality And The Internet

Supporters of dominant scientific theories sometimes attack competing, less favoured theories in ways that conflict with expectations of proper scientific behaviour, for example by using double standards. To reduce concern about their actions, supporters can use a variety of techniques: cover up the violation of expectations; devalue the competing theory and its advocates; interpret the process as proper; use expert panels, meetings and other formal processes to give a stamp of approval to the dominant view; and intimidate opponents. These are the same five methods used regularly by perpetrators of actions widely seen as unjust, such as violent attacks on peaceful protesters. When these methods fail, the attack can backfire on the attackers. Orthodox scientists’ treatment of the theory that AIDS originated from contaminated polio vaccines used in Africa in the 1950s illustrates how this framework can be applied to science. Opponents of this theory have used all five methods of inhibiting concern about violations of expected scientific behaviour. This analysis shows why supporters of orthodoxy have a tactical advantage over challengers.