Seek and ye shall find: test results are what you hypothesize they are

Expert clinicians were given batteries of psychodiagnostic test results (Rorschach, TAT, Draw-A-Person, Bender-Gestalt, Wechsler) to analyze. For half, a battery came along with a suggestion that the person suffers from Borderline Personality disorder, and for half, that battery was accompanied by a suggestion that he suffers from Paranoid Personality disorder. In Study 1, the suggestion was made indirectly, through a background story that preceded the test results. In Study 2, the suggestion was made directly, by the instructions given. The experts saw in the tests what they hypothesized to be there. In particular, the target diagnoses were rated higher when they were hypothesized than when they were not. Copyright © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

中国共产党执政伦理理念初探

执政伦理是执政主体的执政行为的规范体系 ,主要包括执政伦理理念、执政制度伦理、执政主体的道德品质三个方面。执政伦理理念是对如何规范执政主体的执政行为的理性认识 ,是指导执政伦理建构和实践的思想价值基础。立党为公、执政为民、以人为本 ,作为中国共产党执政伦理理念的核心。     

Demonstrating the effect of context on order effects for an army air defense task using the patriot simulator

The results reported herein support the hypotheses that (1) situation-specific, contextual features of a task can cause people to use explanation-based reasoning (Pennington and Hastie, 1993); (2) such reasoning can cause experienced personnel, both individually and in two-person teams, to reinterpret the meaning of the same information when it is presented in two different ordered sequences; and (3) the result will be primacy or recency (or no) effects depending on whether the most recent conflicting information can be explained away or not, respectively. These results extend the belief-adjustment model proposed by Hogarth and Einhorn (1992), which does not address information reinterpretations, and always predicts recency effects for an evaluation task with a short series of conflicting information. More generally, the results demonstrate the importance of situation-specific, contextual features in understanding judgment processes. © 1997 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

自由主义:伦理内涵的嬗变与困境

任何完整的政治理论都有其特定的价值结构,为其现实政治主张、制度结构、政策机制的提供伦理支持,并随着时代政治、经济、文化条件的发展而变换其内涵。西方自由主义政治理论的发展分为启蒙时期、功利主义、现代自由主义等重要阶段,自然权利、功利原则和社会公正分别是其不同时代的核心价值要求。阐释和分析自由主义的伦理内涵变换及其理论和现实困境,为了解当代西方自由主义的价值变换及政策走向提供了一个有益的理论视角。     

东西方医学伦理思维之共通性

从中国古代医者的行医事迹、著作来探寻中国的医者是否在行医过程当中勤守医者的本份,也即类似原则思维的表现。虽然中国古代并没有"医学伦理"这个名词,但从历代具有代表性之医者身上发现,其实在中国古代医者的行医事迹当中,就表现出类似的医学伦理情操。因之,医学伦理原则是俱普世价值的,也即世界上有所谓的共同道德存在。     

道德判断中心理状态和事件因果关系的作用:兼对道德判断双加工过程理论的检验

考察青少年儿童和成人在道德判断中利用心理状态和事件因果关系信息的差异,并验证道德判断双加工过程理论.以道德判断中“行为坏的”程度和“应担负的道德责任程度”作为判断问题类型,共有10～11岁和13～15岁的青少年儿童及大学生各120名,完成道德判断测试任务.结果表明在不同的道德判断问题类型下,事件中他人愿望和信念、因果关系信息的作用模式是不同的,支持道德判断双加工过程理论.10～11岁儿童和13～15岁青少年在判断行为坏的程度时,利用心理状态信息和因果关系信息与成人类似.在判断应担负的道德责任程度时,10～11岁儿童更注重行为结果,并且不能综合应用心理状态信息和事件的因果关系信息.13～15岁青少年的道德判断中心理状态信息和事件因果关系信息的作用与成人的情况类似,但在进行应担负的道德责任程度判断时,还不能融合信念与因果关系信息进行道德判断.研究结果为道德判断双加工过程理论提供了支持,而且表明从儿童青少年到成人,利用心理状态和因果关系信息进行道德判断存在不断发展和成熟的过程.     

The effect of aging on the memory enhancement of the survival judgment task

This study investigated whether or not aging affected the benefit of a survival judgment task. Sixteen young adults and 16 older adults participated in this experiment. In the survival task, participants were requested to judge whether a word was necessary or not in a survival situation. In the self‐referent judgment task, participants were requested to judge how easily the word brings to mind an important personal experience. Participants in each condition were presented 18 concrete nouns at 4‐s intervals. Our results showed that even though the survival judgment task enhanced the memory performance in both the young adults and the older adults, the young adults outperformed the older adults in the survival and self‐referent judgment tasks.     

Alternative motivation: a new challenge to moral judgment internalism

Internalists argue that there is a necessary connection between motivation and moral judgment. The examination of cases plays an important role in philosophical debate about internalism. This debate has focused on cases concerning the failure to act in accordance with a moral judgment, for one reason or another. I call these failure cases. I argue that a different sort of case is also relevant to this debate. This sort of case is characterized by (1) moral judgment and (2) behavior that accords with the content of the moral judgment but that has been performed not because of the moral judgment. Instead it is due to some other source of motivation. I call these alternative motivation cases. I distinguish two sorts of alternative motivation cases, and I argue that externalists have natural explanations of these cases. By contrast, extant internalist accounts of failure cases are inadequate when applied to alternative motivation cases.     

Can the memory enhancement of the survival judgment task be explained by the elaboration hypothesis?: Evidence from a memory load paradigm1

Many reports have described a survival judgment task that requires participants to judge words according to their relevance to a survival situation, eliciting better recall than that obtained in other judgment tasks (e.g., semantic or self‐judgment tasks). Two explanatory hypotheses (the adaptive hypothesis and the elaboration hypothesis) have been proposed. Here we used the memory load paradigm to investigate whether the adaptive hypothesis or the combination hypothesis can better account for the memory enhancement of the survival judgment task. We used a survival judgment task and an autobiographical recall task with the condition of no memory load or memory load. The 48 participants performed four encoding conditions (memory load—survival, no memory load—survival, memory load—autobiographical, and no memory load—autobiographical). The results showed that memory enhancement of the survival judgment task occurred only in the no memory load condition, but not in the memory load condition. Our results support the elaboration hypothesis. We also discuss the validity of the elaboration hypothesis and future directions to be pursued in this research field.     

药物认知增强剂使用的伦理思辨

为提升专注力、记忆力等认知能力,健康人群以“超说明书用药”方式摄入延缓衰老或修复脑损伤造成的认知能力衰退的药品。该种认知增强技术的应用需要通过“伦理之前”的技术可行性审核和“技术之后”的生命伦理辨析才能初步确认其道德容许性。目前针对药物认知增强剂使用的担忧主要来自新药的疗效与风险尚不明确、市场主导下的药物获取渠道难以管控,以及亟待完善的社会规范。因此,当下药物认知增强技术的合理应用需强化政府对个体和商业力量的监管,重视经验数据的获取,以及科研机构对用药风险性的进一步研究与科学指导。