群体愤怒与群体效能对集体行动的驱动：内在责任感的中介作用

采用问卷法（研究一）和实验法（研究二）探讨群体愤怒与群体效能对集体行动意愿的影响及其内在心理机制。结果表明：（1）群体愤怒与群体效能对集体行动意愿有显著的预测作用;（2）内在责任感中介群体愤怒与群体效能对集体行动意愿的影响;（3）应对群体问题的自我效能感是联接群体效能与内在责任感的桥梁（中介变量）。     

"...As we forgive those who trespass against us...": theological reflections on sin and guilt in the hospital environment.

In general parlance the term sin has lost its existential meaning. Originally a Jewish-Christian term within a purely religious context, referring to a wrongdoing with regard to God, sin has slowly become reduced to guilt in the course of the secularization process. Guilt refers to a wrongdoing, especially with regard to fellow human beings. It also refers to errors of judgement with what can be tragic consequences. These errors can occur whenever human beings are called upon to act, including the hospital environment. A Christian hospital has to address the issue of how to deal not only with guilt-ridden misdemeanors, but also with wrongdoing unto God, which overshadows every instance of guilt-ridden human behavior. Here, as in every parish, the Church Service is the place to acknowledge sin, confess sin, and forgive sin, beyond the boundaries of the parish itself.     

Bad News for Moral Error Theorists: There Is No Master Argument Against Companions in Guilt Strategies

A ‘companions in guilt’ (CG) strategy against moral error theory aims to show that the latter proves too much: if sound, it supports an implausible error-theoretic conclusion in other areas such as epistemic or practical reasoning. Christopher Cowie [2016 Cowie, C. 2016. Good News for Moral Error Theorists: A Master Argument Against Companions in Guilt Strategies, Australasian Journal of Philosophy 94/1: 115–30.[Taylor &; Francis Online], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]] has recently produced what he claims is a ‘master argument’ against all such strategies. The essence of his argument is that CG arguments cannot work because they are afflicted by internal incoherence or inconsistency. I argue, first, that Cowie's master argument does not succeed. Beyond this, I argue that there is no good reason to think that any such argument—one that purports to identify an internal incoherence in CG arguments—can succeed. Second, I argue that the main substantive area of disagreement between error theorists and CG theorists essentially concerns the conceptual profile of epistemic reasons—specifically, whether they are strongly categorical—not the ontological question of whether such reasons exist (in some form or other). I then develop an argument in favour of the CG theorist's position by considering the moral error theorist's arguments in support of the conceptual claim that moral reasons are strongly categorical. These include, notably, criticisms made by Joyce [2011] and Olson [2014] of Finlay's [2008] ‘end relational’ view of morality, according to which moral reasons are relative to some end or standard, hence not strongly categorical. Examining these criticisms, I argue that, based on what moral error theorists have said regarding the conceptual profile of moral reasons, there is a strong case to be made that moral reasons are strongly categorical (hence, according to the moral error theorist, ontologically problematic) if and only if epistemic reasons are.     

AFFECT,SYMPTOM, FANTASY,DREAM: CLINICAL AND THEORETICAL CONSIDERATIONS

A symptom being studied in the process of analysis can be seen as not unlike the unconscious affect it sprang from. The author presents a case in which a symptom, premature ejaculation, was analogous to the unconscious affect of guilt, which itself seemed to be a premature defensive transformation of a deeper current of anger. Guilt was interpreted as if it were a psychic premature ejaculation, a defensive derailment of anger. Fantasy and dream seemed to be engaged in similar transformations, with a fantasy of “premature incarceration” not unlike the symptom itself in its analogous functioning. Analysis of affect, symptom, fantasy, and dream in complex, integrative analytic process led not only to resolution of the symptom itself, but also to a deeper understanding of the mind's complex functioning in general.     

基于人性本真性的拟人化广告的负面情绪与态度——愧疚感的中介作用

通常来说,商业活动中的拟人化设计可以起到增加亲切感、提升产品评价和增加购买意愿作用。然而,产品广告中不恰当的拟人化设计所引发的负面情绪和态度却很少受到学术界和实践界的关注。本文以食物广告的拟人化设计为研究背景,发现广告中对食用对象进行不恰当的拟人化设计会让人产生愧疚感,进而对广告态度产生负面态度。更进一步,本文表明这种负面效应只发生在感知该拟人化对象的人性本真性高的情况。当消费者不相信拟人化对象真的会拥有人性(本真性低)时,拟人化广告并不会给人们带来明显的负面情绪和态度。     

When Self-Blame Is Rational and Appropriate: The Limited Utility of Socratic Questioning in the Context of Moral Injury: Commentary on Wachen et al. (2016)

In this commentary, we argue that a generally sound therapeutic technique—Socratic questioning—is ill-suited to address a common variant of combat-related emotional and psychological distress. Specifically, moral injury is a term used to describe a syndrome of shame, self-handicapping, anger, and demoralization that occurs when deeply held beliefs and expectations about moral and ethical conduct are transgressed. Importantly, moral injury can and often does result from instances of intentional perpetration. We contend that challenging the accuracy of self-blame in such cases is conceptually problematic and potentially harmful. Such an approach is based on a questionable premise—i.e., that self-blame and resulting guilt are inherently illogical or inaccurate. Though this is often the case, it is not invariably so. We briefly describe an alternate approach—Adaptive Disclosure—that allows for accurate and legitimate self-blame when warranted but also promotes the possibilities of self-forgiveness, compassion, and moral reparation.     

Moral foundations tell us why guilt induces unfair allocation in multi‐party interactions

Previous studies have demonstrated that a sense of guilt promotes and maintains social fairness in two‐party interactions (Psychological Bulletin, 115, 1994 and 243). However, the situation is much more complex in three‐party or multi‐party interactions. De Hooge et al. (Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100, 2011 and 462) found that guilt could not only induce pro‐social behaviour towards the victim, but also have a disadvantageous impact on a third party. In the present study, we attempt to explain how guilt promotes unfair allocations from a moral foundations perspective. We conducted two experiments using a ‘three‐party dictator game’ paradigm. Firstly, it was repeatedly verified that guilt could induce unfair allocations in three‐party interactions. Secondly, five moral foundations (harm, fairness, ingroup, hierarchy and purity) were measured. Then the moderating and main effects of these five indices on how guilt affects the fair allocation of resources were explored using regression analysis. The results show that competition between harm and fairness in individual traits can explain the disadvantageous effect of guilt on fair allocations: the fairness foundation promoted equality in allocation, while the harm foundation promoted victim compensation.     

童年中晚期攻击的发展轨迹和性别差异：基于母亲报告的分析

采用母亲报告的方法, 对1618名儿童的攻击进行了4年(9岁~12岁)的追踪研究, 分析了童年中晚期攻击的一般发展轨迹、亚组发展轨迹以及性别差异。结果发现：(1)总体上, 童年中晚期儿童的攻击水平随年龄而下降。(2)基于亚组的准参数模型分析表明, 童年中晚期母亲报告的儿童攻击呈现三条不同的发展轨迹, 即无攻击轨迹、低攻击—下降轨迹以及持续高攻击轨迹, 各轨迹组人数比例分别约为68.7%、26.8%、4.5%。持续高攻击轨迹组以及低攻击—下降轨迹组的儿童在童年晚期均面临一定程度的人际适应困难。(3)多项Logit模型以及卡方检验表明, 男生更倾向于归属于攻击轨迹组(高或者低攻击轨迹组), 而女生更倾向于归属于无攻击轨迹组; 但这并不说明高攻击轨迹组中没有女生, 约2%的女生属于高攻击轨迹组。     

Postponing trauma: The dangers of telling

Surviving a major historical trauma has consequences that are difficult to live with. Survivors who remain silent are often condemned to a desiccated existence, a dried‐out life, a death in life. Survivors who speak out run an even greater risk. Telling their ghastly tale may trigger somatic consequences, psychotic episodes, or even suicide. As to the psychoanalytic cure, the free association it requires carries its own danger: negative therapeutic reaction in sometimes extreme forms. Avoidance of horror may turn into avoidance of life itself. Awful as it may seem, this avoidance of life may represent a victory over a menacing chaos. Should we as analysts accept the risk of endangering such a victory, no matter how unsatisfactory? The psychoanalytical injunction to speak out may trigger an upsurge of shame and terror. Is subjectivation always possible? This paper is about what happens when denial and splitting strategies are suspended, when ‘crypts’ are opened. Is there an analytic ‘poros’ allowing for a controlled return of affects? Is there a therapeutic solution to the problem of telling a wreckage without being caught in it? The dangers of ‘telling’ will be discussed in regard to new analytic strategies and new interpretive registers. When the ‘silent psychic sharing’ proves insufficient, some analysts go so far as to take part in the shame, share the grief, ‘lend their own psyche’, become a ‘double’ of the analysand, accept the existence of ‘sanctuaries’. To what effect?     

Impact of Conflict on Mental Health in Northern Ireland: The Mediating Role of Intergroup Forgiveness and Collective Guilt

The aim of the present research was to investigate the mediating role of group-level forgiveness and guilt in the relationship between victimhood (the extent to which the conflict affected an individual's life), exposure to violence (the level of violence in their area of residence), and group identity on the one hand, and mild psychiatric morbidity on the other. Specifically the study focused on the psychological impact of the ethnopolitical conflict in Northern Ireland, utilizing people's identification with either the Catholic or Protestant community. Our results revealed that intergroup forgiveness mediated the relationship between both victimhood and group identification, as predictors, and mild psychiatric morbidity. Collective guilt, on the other hand, mediated the relationship between both exposure to violence and group identification, as predictors, and intergroup forgiveness. Overall this study shows that forgiveness and collective guilt can act as mediators in the relationship between impact of ethnopolitical conflict and mental health, at the group level, and thus demonstrates their centrality to the reconciliation process. Implications for intergroup reconciliation initiatives in Northern Ireland are discussed.