行为决策中的默认效应

默认效应指的是当存在默认选项时, 人们决策时倾向于保留默认选项而不做出改变的一种现象。这种现象广泛存在于器官捐献政策、退休金储蓄计划和消费决策等领域并在这些领域中有巨大的应用价值。目前, 研究者主要从损失规避、质询理论、暗含的推荐和神经心理机制四个方面解释默认效应的形成机制。默认效应还受到努力成本、默认选项的框架和个人经验等因素影响。未来的研究可以从深入探讨默认效应的产生根源、加强其跨文化研究以及拓展其应用领域这三个方面来展开。     

A Neo-Kantian foundation of Corporate Social Responsibility

‘Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is conceptualized in many ways. We argue that one cannot be indifferent about the issue of its conceptualization. In terms of methodology, our position is that any conceptual discussion must embed CSR in political theory. With regard to substance, we link up with the discussion on whether CSR must be defined on the basis of a tripartite or a quadripartite division of business responsibilities. We share A.B. Carroll’s intuition that a quadripartite division is called for as a basis to define CSR. However, defending the quadripartite division of business responsibilities requires that the distinctions between economic, legal, ethical and discretionary business responsibilities be made intelligible. Carroll’s account is defective in this respect. We argue that contemporary Neo-Kantian political ethics is able to make sense of these distinctions, because of its specific interpretation of liberalism. Interestingly, from a conventional liberal perspective this interpretation of liberalism is atypical, as it extends public morality beyond the domain of the law.

Honneth and the Communitarians: Towards a Recognitive Critical Theory of Community

This paper attempts to sketch a critical model of political community by drawing upon recent contributions to the theory of ‘recognition’, particularly in the work of Axel Honneth. The paper proceeds by, first, delineating key features shared by a range of positions associated with ‘communitarianism’, along with the limitations and problems incurred by these commitments. The second part of the paper attempts to mobilise Honneth’s theoretical work to develop a conception of community that shares a number of the basic premisesvis-á-vis political life associated with communitarianism, but which nevertheless accommodates the reservations expressed by communitarianism’s liberal and radical critics. This revised version was published online in August 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

After the Terror: A Book and Further Thoughts

There are great goods desired by all of us, and the lack of themmakes for bad lives. One sample of bad African lives involves aloss of 20 million years of living time. The questions raised bythese and other facts are to be answered by the Principle ofHumanity, about bad lives and rationality. It is superior tomorality of relationship and all else, and in a way is undeniable.The principle together with other things issues in six propositions.One gives us a moral responsibility, our politicians at our head,for the terrorism of September 11. To be ordinary is not to beinnocent. Another proposition is that the Palestinians have a moralright to their terrorism. The latter proposition can be given stillmore support than in the book from which this paper derives.     

简论社会主义道德的核心和原则

社会主义道德的核心和原则,是理解和把握社会主义道德的本质特征、先进性、高尚性、科学性的关键。为人民服务的丰富内涵及其作为社会主义道德核心的内在根据。集体主义的科学含又及其作为社会主义道德原则的全面分析。     

原始道德的自制力从何而来?

原始道德的自制力,主要表现为原始人对其生物本能的克制和调整。它来源于原始先民的精神心理与其群体社会生活的互动机制。具体包括两种生产活动的社会制约,神灵信仰的敬畏心理,自我观念的发生与发展,原始理解的能力与机制等因素。     

The Insufficiency of Integrity

As part of its evolving notions of self, contemporary Western culture has come to regard integrity as a preeminent public and private virtue. The meanings now given to integrity appear to cluster around its form, which is personal coherence, and its content, which is standing for something important. Building on Stephen Carter's explication of integrity, and in response to its veneration as a moral panacea, three limitations of integrity are discussed. First, integrity does not guarantee that right and wrong have actually been discerned, only that an attempt has been made, that moral reflection has occurred. Second, integrity does not necessarily engender or even preserve interpersonal peace, but instead frequently causes conflict it is then unable to resolve. Third, integrity does not always precipitate or prevent the reform of social structures and organizations, because it remains subject to the exercise of interpersonal power.     

Indiscriminability as Indiscernibility by Default

Most solutions to the sorites reject its major premise, i.e. the quantified conditional . This rejection appears to imply a discrimination between two elements that are supposed to be indiscriminable. Thus, the puzzle of the sorites involves in a fundamental way the notion of indiscriminability. This paper analyzes this relation and formalizes it, in a way that makes the rejection of the major premise more palatable. The intuitive idea is that we consider two elements indiscriminable by default, i.e. unless we know some information that discriminates between them. Specifically, following Rough Set Theory, two elements are defined to be indiscernible if they agree on the vague property in question. Then, a is defined to be indiscriminable from b if a is indiscernible by default from b. That is to say, a is indiscriminable from b if it is consistent to assume that a and b agree on the relevant vague property. Indiscernibility by default is formalized with the use of Default Logic, and is shown to have intuitively desirable properties: it is entailed by equality, is reflexive and symmetric. And while the relation is neither transitive nor substitutive, it is “almost” substitutive. This definition of indiscriminability is incorporated into three major theories of vagueness, namely the supervaluationist, epistemic, and contextualist views. Each one of these theories is reduced to a different strategy dealing with multiple extensions in Default Logic, and the rejection of the major premise is shown to follow naturally. Thus, while the proposed notion of indiscriminability does not solve the sorites by itself, it does make the unintuitive conclusion of many of its proposed solutions—the rejection of the major premise—a bit easier to accept.     

The development of children's preferences for equality and equity across 13 individualistic and collectivist cultures

A concern for fairness is a fundamental and universal element of morality. To examine the extent to which cultural norms are integrated into fairness cognitions and influence social preferences regarding equality and equity, a large sample of children (N 2,163) aged 4–11 were tested in 13 diverse countries. Children participated in three versions of a third‐party, contextualized distributive justice game between two hypothetical recipients differing in terms of wealth, merit, and empathy. Social decision‐making in these games revealed universal age‐related shifts from equality‐based to equity‐based distribution motivations across cultures. However, differences in levels of individualism and collectivism between the 13 countries predicted the age and extent to which children favor equity in each condition. Children from the most individualistic cultures endorsed equitable distributions to a greater degree than children from more collectivist cultures when recipients differed in regards to wealth and merit. However, in an empathy context where recipients differed in injury, children from the most collectivist cultures exhibited greater preferences to distribute resource equitably compared to children from more individualistic cultures. Children from the more individualistic cultures also favored equitable distributions at an earlier age than children from more collectivist cultures overall. These results demonstrate aspects of both cross‐cultural similarity and divergence in the development of fairness preferences.     

宗教启动会使人更加道德吗?

通过启动被试的宗教信仰状态, 进而探讨宗教对个体道德的影响作用, 这是近年来宗教心理学研究的热点问题, 但是围绕此问题的研究结论并不统一。有研究发现, 宗教启动可以增强个体的道德。但也有研究表明宗教启动会使个体更不道德。宗教启动对道德的影响是通过宗教信念的中介作用而实现的, 被试的信仰类型、性别、实验启动的方式及内容、以及被试的人格倾向则会因为影响中介信念的激活而调节宗教启动与道德的关系。未来研究需要进一步创新启动实验研究方法, 探索影响宗教与道德的关系的调节变量, 结合跨文化、跨学科的研究视角, 更深入地挖掘这一问题。