外化行为问题与集体道德情绪、集体责任行为之关系：班级氛围的调节效应*

采用调查法,随机选取上海市3所普通中小学四、六、八、十年级的755名学生为被试,探讨班级氛围在外化行为问题与集体道德情绪、集体责任行为关系间的调节作用。结果表明：(1)男生的外化行为问题显著高于女生,其感知的班级氛围显著低于女生。而男、女生集体道德情绪与集体责任行为的性别差异不显著;(2)学生感知的班级氛围随年龄的增长先下降再上升,八年级时最低;集体道德情绪和集体责任行为随着年级的增高而呈下降趋势,小学生(四、六年级)的集体道德情绪和集体责任行为得分均比中学生(八、十年级)高,高一(十年级)学生的得分处于最低水平;(3)外化行为问题与集体道德情绪、集体责任行为的关系受班级氛围的调节。与消极的班级氛围相比,积极的班级氛围能够弱化外化行为问题与集体道德情绪、集体责任行为的负向关联。结果揭示了积极的班级氛围对外化行为问题学生具有一定的保护作用,有助于改善这些学生的社会适应能力。     

JUST WAR THEORY,HUMANITARIAN INTERVENTION,AND THE NEED FOR A DEMOCRATIC FEDERATION

The primary purpose of government is to secure public goods that cannot be achieved by free markets. The Coordination Principle tells us to consolidate sovereign power in a single institution to overcome collective action problems that otherwise prevent secure provision of the relevant public goods. There are several public goods that require such coordination at the global level, chief among them being basic human rights. The claim that human rights require global coordination is supported in three main steps. First, I consider Pogge's and Habermas's analyses as alternatives to Hobbesian conceptions of justice. Second, I consider the core conventions of international law, which are in tension with the primacy of state sovereignty in the UN system. Third, I argue that the just war tradition does not limit just causes for war to self‐defense; it supports saving innocent third parties from crimes against humanity as a just reason for war. While classical authors focused less on this issue, the point is especially clear in twentieth‐century just war theories, such as those offered by the American Catholic bishops, Jean Elshtain, Brian Orend, and Michael Walzer. Against Walzer, I argue that we add intractable military tyranny to the list of horrors meriting intervention if other ad bellum conditions are met. But these results require us to reexamine the “just authority” of first resort to govern such interventions. The Coordination Principle implies that we should create a transnational federation with consolidated powers in place of a treaty organization requiring near‐unanimity. But to be legitimate, such a global institution must also be directly answerable to the citizens of its member states. While the UN Security Council is inadequate on both counts, a federation of democracies with a directly elected executive and legislature could meet both conditions.     

The Factor Structure of the Frost Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale in University Students

The Frost Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (FMPS) is a widely used measure of perfectionism. Previous studies of the nature of the factors of the FMPS have resulted in mixed findings and have failed to identify a stable factor structure. This study investigated the factor structure of the FMPS using both exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), addressing previous methodological limitations. Participants were 6,449 students from two Australian universities. Exploratory factor analysis suggested a five‐factor model and a reduction in variables from 35 to 29 (FMPS‐29). CFA demonstrated goodness of fit of the revised measure. We also compared our model with a number of existing measurement models of perfection and found the proposed model provided a superior fit for this university student population. Support was found for the two second‐order constructs commonly referred to as adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism, although there appears to be little benefit in using this model over the first‐order model. Implications of the findings are discussed.     

从《孔子家语》看孔子的差异心理思想

该文以《孔子家语》为文本,对孔子的差异心理思想进行研究。讨论的问题有：《孔子家语》一书的性质,孔子论类型差异与孔子论个别差异。     

Collective Guilt and Collective Guilt Feelings

Can collectives feel guilt with respect to what they have done? It hasbeen claimed that they cannot. Yet in everyday discourse collectives areoften held to feel guilt, criticized because they do not, and so on.Among other things, this paper considers what such so-called collectiveguilt feelings amount to. If collective guilt feelings are sometimesappropriate, it must be the case that collectives can indeed beguilty. The paper begins with an account of what it is for a collectiveto intend to do something and to act in light of that intention.According to this account, and in senses that are explained, there is acollective that intends to do something if and only if the members of agiven population are jointly committed to intend as a body to do thatthing. A related account of collective belief is also presented. It isthen argued that, depending on the circumstances, a group's action canbe free as opposed to coerced, and that the idea that a collective assuch can be guilty of performing a wrongful act makes sense. The ideathat a group might feel guilt may be rejected because it is assumed thatto feel guilt is to experience a ``pang'' or ``twinge'' of guilt –nothing more and nothing less. Presumably, though, there must becognitions and perhaps behavior involved. In addition, the primacy, eventhe necessity, of ``feeling-sensations'' to feeling guilt in theindividual case has been questioned. Without the presumption that it isalready clear what feeling guilt amounts to, three proposals as to thenature of collective guilt feelings are considered. A ``feeling ofpersonal guilt'' is defined as a feeling of guilt over one's own action.It is argued that it is implausible to construe collective guiltfeelings in terms of members' feelings of personal guilt. ``Membershipguilt feelings'' involve a group member's feeling of guilt over what hisor her group has done. It is argued that such feelings are intelligibleif the member is party to the joint commitment that lies at the base ofthe relevant collective intention and action. However, an account ofcollective guilt in terms of membership guilt feelings is found wanting.Finally, a ``plural subject'' account of collective guilt feelings isarticulated, such that they involve a joint commitment to feel guilt asa body. The parties to a joint commitment of the kind in question may asa result find themselves experiencing ``pangs'' of the kind associatedwith personal and membership guilt feelings. Since these pangs, byhypothesis, arise as a result of the joint commitment to feel guilt as abody, they might be thought of as providing a kind of phenomenology forcollective guilt. Be that as it may, it is argued the plural subjectaccount has much to be said for it.     

Group Responsibility for Ethnic Conflict

When a group of persons such as a nation orcorporation has a relatively clear structureand set of decision procedures, it is capableof acting and should, it can well be argued, beconsidered morally as well as legallyresponsible. This is not because it is afull-fledged moral person, but becauseassigning responsibility is a human practice,and we have good moral reasons to adopt thepractice of considering such groupsresponsible. From such judgments, however,little follows about the responsibility ofindividual members of such groups; much moreneeds to be ascertained about which officialsor executives are responsible for what beforewe can consider individual members of nationsor corporations responsible.Whether an unorganized group can be morallyresponsible is much less clear, but there havebeen useful discussions in recent years of thepossible responsibility of whites for racism,or males for sexism, and the like. In thisessay I explore arguments for consideringgroups or their members responsible for ethnicconflict. Such groups may lack a clearorganizational structure, but they are notrandom assortments of persons. Groups can andoften should take responsibility for theattitudes and actions of their members, and cansometimes be considered responsible for failingto do so. And persons often can and shouldtake responsibility for the attitudes andactions of the groups of which they aremembers.     

初中男生个体攻击性与群体攻击性的差异

运用实验法和问卷法对118名初中男学生进行攻击性的研究.比较了四种不同类型的攻击行为.包括群体之间、个体之间、群体与个体之间、个体与群体之间.结果显示:群体无论是作为攻击来源还是攻击目标都能起到增加攻击行为的情境作用;个体之间与群体之间在攻击性方面有显著差异;群体之间相互作用时表现出的攻击性远高于个体之间相互作用时表现出的攻击性:个体与群体相互作用时比个体之间相互作用时表现出更高的攻击性.     

Threat to Ethnic Identity: The Experience of White Afrikaans-Speaking Participants in Postapartheid South Africa

Abstract

The dismantling of apartheid and the postapartheid dispensation had far-reaching implications for all the citizens of South Africa. In an urban sample of White Afrikaans-speaking South Africans (Afrikaners) in postapartheid South Africa, the authors investigated perceptions of threat to ethnic identity, as well as correlates of those perceptions. The respondents experienced threat on 2 levels: The 1st was distinctive continuity, the concern that their ethnic group would not continue as a distinctive group in society. The 2nd was the evaluative dimension of ethnic identity (i.e., well-being), the concern that group membership would no longer contribute to positive self-esteem. The respondents experienced greater threat on the 2nd level, reflecting predominantly negative experiences as White Afrikaans-speaking persons in postapartheid South Africa. A high threat perception on the 2nd level was associated with (a) a perception of other groups' negative evaluations of their ethnic group, (b) negative attitudes toward political changes, and (c) perceptions of illegitimacy and instability of the postapartheid political system. The respondents who felt that Afrikaners would not continue as a distinctive group in society had a more positive attitude toward the sociopolitical changes, did not show strong ethnic identification, and had a negative collective self-esteem. They were also politically more liberal. Those findings are discussed in relation to theoretical expectations.     

部分线索对记忆提取的影响:认知抑制能力的作用

在回忆时,以刚刚学过的部分项目作为提取线索,被试的回忆成绩反而比没有任何线索时的回忆成绩差,这一现象被称为部分线索效应。该效应通常被认为是抑制执行控制过程对非线索项目记忆表征强度抑制的结果。本研究以Stroop效应量(实验1)和工作记忆容量(实验2)为指标,从个体差异角度考察了认知抑制能力对部分线索效应的影响。结果发现,Stroop效应量与部分线索效应各指标呈显著负相关,Stroop效应量越小,部分线索效应各指标的值越大;工作记忆容量与部分线索效应各指标呈显著正相关,高工作记忆容量个体的部分线索效应各指标的值也更大。结果表明,认知抑制能力越强,部分线索对回忆的破坏作用越大,研究结果支持部分线索效应的提取抑制假说。     

群体内疚:界定、心理机制、行动倾向及干预策略

当个体认为内群体为外群体受到的不道德伤害负有责任时会体验到群体内疚。该情绪常见的触发情境包括过往历史的伤害事件、当下的群际冲突、不公正的社会关系及未来的伤害事件。群体认同、内群体责任和不当性评估是影响群体内疚产生的三大心理机制。群体内疚会导致施害群体对受害群体表现出积极行动,如友善态度,冲突和解、群体补偿及群际支持。通过群体肯定、自我肯定、促进共同认同、强调内群体责任及展现已有补偿行为等干预策略可以引发施害群体的群体内疚。未来的研究应澄清群体内疚的成因机制,进一步探索群体内疚与补偿行为间的作用关系。