参照性交流对关系类别间接性学习的促进作用

以大学生为被试,以4特征虚拟外星生物为实验材料,采用类别的间接性学习范式——个人条件和参照条件,及一个无功能条件,通过三个实验任务（功能预测、自由分类和维度选择）,探讨参照性交流范式下关系类别的间接性学习特点。结果发现：类别的间接性学习条件下,自由分类任务中,被试更倾向于选择关系作为类标准;功能预测的关系类别的间接性学习过程中,参照条件下的功能预测成绩显著高于个人条件,这种差异体现在参照惯例形成的学习过程的中后期;关系类别的间接性学习条件下,参照条件下被试的选择性注意水平显著高于个人条件,这种差异主要表现于选择性注意的指向性方面,而不体现于选择性注意的集中性（对无关维度的抑制）方面。     

学习方式对关系类别间接性学习的影响

以96名大学生为被试,以4特征虚拟外星生物为实验材料,通过类别的间接性学习,探讨学习方式对关系类别间接性学习的影响,结果发现：类别的间接性学习条件下,限定分类任务中,被试更倾向于选择关系作为类标准;参照条件下被试限定分类结果与标准的关系类别的分类结果的杰卡德相似性显著高于个人条件;被试分类结果的简单关系类别的杰卡德相似性显著高于复杂关系类别的杰卡德相似性,4特征关系类别的间接性学习中存在单一性效应。     

More lives, better lives

Although many people believe that more people would be better, arguments intended to show this are unconvincing. I consider one of Parfit's arguments for a related conclusion, that even when both are worth living, we ought to prefer the better of two lives. Were this argument successful, or so I claim, then it would follow that more people would be better. But there aren't reasons for preferring the better of two lives. Nor is an attempted rejoinder effective. We can agree that there aren't reasons for preferring the better of two lives, and yet still maintain there are reasons for improving lives.     

内隐刻板印象研究综述

内隐刻板印象是存在的,并且比较集中地体现在内隐种族刻板印象、内隐性别刻板印象等方面.在相关研究的基础上,逐渐形成了判断潜伏期测量、投射测量等有效捕捉和研究内隐刻板印象的间接测量方法.     

关系复杂性对关系类别间接性学习的影响

以216名大学生为被试,使用关系复杂性变化的三种虚拟外星生物实验材料,创设个人功能预测的关系类别的间接性学习条件和参照性交流功能预测的关系类别的间接性学习条件,探讨关系复杂性对关系类别间接性学习的影响。结果发现:关系类别的功能预测间接性学习过程中,关系复杂性和学习条件的交互作用极其显著,具体来讲,关系复杂性对关系类别间接性学习的影响仅显著地表现在参照性交流关系类别间接性学习过程中;当学习材料为4特征复杂关系时,参照条件下被试功能预测成绩极其显著高于个人条件,当学习材料为6特征复杂关系加二阶同功能简单关系时,两种学习条件间不存在显著差异,当学习材料为6特征复杂关系加二阶异功能简单关系时,个人条件极其显著高于参照条件。     

母亲守门行为与母亲教养投入、母子依恋的关系及发展性差异

基于家庭系统理论与依恋理论提出了一个母亲守门行为通过母亲教养投入预测母子依恋的间接效应模型, 同时考察了这一模型在青少年发展阶段上的差异。采用问卷法对597个核心家庭的母亲和青少年进行调查, 结果发现：(1)总体上, 母亲开门行为对母亲教养投入和母子依恋均具有正向预测作用, 母亲教养投入对母子依恋具有正向预测作用, 间接效应模型成立; 母亲关门行为对母亲教养投入的预测作用不显著, 对母子依恋具有负向预测作用, 间接效应模型不成立; (2)从发展阶段来看, 母亲开门行为的间接效应模型在三个发展阶段均成立, 且间接效应大小无差异; 母亲关门行为的间接效应模型只在早期和后期成立, 且两发展阶段的作用性质相反, 早期为正向预测作用, 后期为负向预测作用。结果补充和扩展了母亲守门行为的作用效果研究, 并且强调了青少年发展阶段在其中的作用, 对家庭教育实践具有一定的指导意义。     

Teacher report and direct assessment of preferences for identifying reinforcers for young children

Teachers were asked to identify and rank 10 preferred stimuli for 9 toddlers, and a hierarchy of preference for these items was determined via a direct preference assessment. The reinforcing efficacy of the most highly preferred items identified by each method was evaluated concurrently in a reinforcer assessment. The reinforcer assessment showed that all stimuli identified as highly preferred via the direct preference assessment and teacher rankings functioned as reinforcers. The highest ranked stimuli in the direct assessment were more reinforcing than the teachers' top-ranked stimuli for 5 of 9 participants, whereas the teachers' top-ranked stimulus was more reinforcing than the highest ranked stimulus of the direct assessment for only 1 child. A strong positive correlation between rankings generated through the two assessments was identified for only 1 of the 9 participants. Despite poor correspondence between rankings generated through the teacher interview and direct preference assessment, results of the reinforcer assessment suggest that both methods are effective in identifying reinforcers for toddlers.     

Is Equality Essentially Comparative?

Larry Temkin has shown that Derek Parfit’s well-known Mere Addition Paradox suggests a powerful argument for the intransitivity of the relation “better than.” The crux of the argument is the view that equality is essentially comparative, according to which the same inequality can be evaluated differently depending on what it is being compared to. The comparative view of equality should be rejected, I argue, and hence so too this argument for intransitivity.

REPLY TO JULIA DRIVER,TIMM TRIPLETT,AND KATHLEEN WALLACE

Abstract: Julia Driver, Timm Triplett, and Kathleen Wallace challenge my account of moral arrogance, and Triplett and Wallace challenge its application to the problem of abortion. I try to show here that Driver's attempt to defend consequentialism from my charge that it promotes moral arrogance is successful only if consequentialism explicitly gives up what has been considered one of its major virtues. I acknowledge that Triplett has uncovered some unclarity in my claim that the moral acceptability of abortion is an unresolvable moral issue. I also acknowledge that Wallace has uncovered some unclarity in my account of moral arrogance. After clarifying that account, I try to meet her challenge to defend my claim that it is not morally arrogant for a state to place some restrictions on abortions.     

Against Blameless Wrongdoing

I argue against the standard view that it is possible to describe extensionally different consequentialist theories by describing different evaluative focal points. I argue that for consequentialist purposes, the important sense of the word act must include all motives and side effects, and thus these things cannot be separated.