全文获取类型
收费全文 | 336篇 |
免费 | 59篇 |
国内免费 | 70篇 |
出版年
2023年 | 10篇 |
2022年 | 13篇 |
2021年 | 20篇 |
2020年 | 19篇 |
2019年 | 18篇 |
2018年 | 15篇 |
2017年 | 19篇 |
2016年 | 17篇 |
2015年 | 14篇 |
2014年 | 20篇 |
2013年 | 50篇 |
2012年 | 19篇 |
2011年 | 16篇 |
2010年 | 14篇 |
2009年 | 21篇 |
2008年 | 31篇 |
2007年 | 23篇 |
2006年 | 22篇 |
2005年 | 18篇 |
2004年 | 19篇 |
2003年 | 15篇 |
2002年 | 10篇 |
2001年 | 7篇 |
2000年 | 8篇 |
1999年 | 6篇 |
1998年 | 4篇 |
1997年 | 8篇 |
1996年 | 1篇 |
1995年 | 2篇 |
1994年 | 1篇 |
1993年 | 1篇 |
1992年 | 1篇 |
1985年 | 2篇 |
1976年 | 1篇 |
排序方式: 共有465条查询结果,搜索用时 15 毫秒
81.
Jennie Louise 《Ethical Theory and Moral Practice》2009,12(4):345-364
The ‘Wrong Kind of Reason’ problem for buck-passing theories (theories which hold that the normative is explanatorily or conceptually
prior to the evaluative) is to explain why the existence of pragmatic or strategic reasons for some response to an object
does not suffice to ground evaluative claims about that object. The only workable reply seems to be to deny that there are reasons of the ‘wrong kind’ for responses, and to argue that these are really reasons for wanting, trying, or intending to
have that response. In support of this, it is pointed out that awareness of pragmatic or strategic considerations, unlike
awareness of reasons of the ‘right kind’, are never sufficient by themselves to produce the responses for which they are reasons.
I argue that this phenomenon cannot be used as a criterion for distinguishing reasons-for-a-response from reasons-for-wanting-to-have-a-response.
I subsequently investigate the possibility of basing this distinction on a claim that the responses in question (e.g. admiration
or desire) are themselves inherently normative; I conclude that this approach is also unsuccessful. Hence, the ‘direct response’
phenomenon cannot be used to rule out the possibility of pragmatic or strategic reasons for responses; and the rejection of
such reasons therefore cannot be used to circumvent the Wrong Kind of Reason Problem.
相似文献
Jennie LouiseEmail: |
82.
83.
Two inter-related studies examined the effect of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on attitudes towards war and violence. A three-wave between-subjects analysis revealed that attitudes towards war became more positive after September 11, 2001 and remained high over a year afterwards. Self-reported trait physical aggression also rose after September 11. Attitudes towards penal code violence (PCV) became more positive immediately after September 11, but were somewhat reduced a year afterward. A two-wave within subjects study revealed that war attitudes became even more positive at 2 months post-September 11. Attitudes towards PCV became less positive during this time period, but only for women. Other aggression-related attitudes were not affected in either study. These studies demonstrate that a large-scale event can change attitudes, but those attitudes must be directly relevant to the event. 相似文献
84.
85.
86.
87.
88.
态度及其与行为模式述评 总被引:2,自引:0,他引:2
态度一直是社会心理学的核心问题,态度对于预测行为具有重要作用。本文阐述了态度的界定、态度的结构模型及态度预测行为模型的各种理论,在这些理论的基础上,提出了态度预测行为的另一模型。 相似文献
89.
为了解释考试作弊的"传染"现象,研究探讨大学考试情境中他人作弊对观察者将来作弊意向的效应,假设他人作弊通过社会损失和作弊态度的链式中介作用对观察者将来作弊意向产生效应。研究采用他人作弊问卷、社会损失问卷、作弊态度问卷、将来作弊意向问卷,对765名在校大学生进行调查。在控制了性别、年级、第一次作弊的时间和经常作弊的开始时间之后,研究发现:(1)他人作弊正向预测观察者将来作弊意向;(2)社会损失在他人作弊和观察者将来作弊意向之间起中介作用;(3)社会损失与作弊态度在他人作弊与观察者将来作弊意向之间起链式中介作用。研究为理解考试作弊的"传染"现象及其内在机制提供了有价值的视角。 相似文献
90.
The present study assessed the effect of gender similarity as a potential moderator of the relationships between person–group (P–G) value fit and work attitudes. Specifically, we predicted that the effect of P–G value fit (in terms of social integration values) on individual attitudes would be stronger for individuals who had a similar gender than those of a different gender. Based on data obtained from 197 employees in South Korea, we found that when the focal individual had high gender similarity with his or her group, the relationships between P–G value fit and job satisfaction and between P–G value fit and turnover intentions were more prominent. Furthermore, these moderating effects were significant for men, but not for women. 相似文献