Rights and Morals, Issues, and Candidate Integrity: Insights into the Role of the News Media

In recent American political discourse, elections and debates tend to be presented by the news media as collisions of basic principles, with opposing parties advancing beliefs about what is right and what is wrong. When news coverage of an election campaign focuses on issues that emphasize rights and morals, voting behavior may be affected in two ways: Citizens become likely to form and make use of evaluations of the integrity of the candidates, and citizens become motivated to seek an issue-position "match" with candidates on those issues for which discourse is ethically charged (particularly when they hold a similar interpretation of the issue). These ideas were tested in an experiment in which labor union members and undergraduate students were presented with news stories about the contrasting positions of fictional candidates for elective office. Across three political environments, all information was held constant except for systematic alteration of a different issue in each environment. These three issues (abortion, gun control, and health care) vary in the types of value conflicts emphasized in news coverage. The results shed light on how individuals process, interpret, and use issue coverage in choosing among candidates.     

When mixed options are preferred in multiple‐trial decisions

We report three studies showing that in prospective multiple‐trial decisions people often select a mix of sure and risky options over pure bundles of either option. Such a preference is not ‘rational’ because a mixed option cannot be the EV‐maximizing choice. Experiment 1 confirmed a mixed‐option preference for gains but not for losses. Showing a graph of the multiple‐trial outcome distribution reduced but did not eliminate this effect, suggesting that it is not due purely to a failure to aggregate correctly over the multiple trials. Experiment 2 replicated the mixed option preference using a wider range of problems. Experiment 3 compared choices in the trinary choice conditions used in Experiments 1 and 2 with binary choices between pairs of the multiple‐trial sure, mixed, and risky options. In the binary choice condition the mixed option was no longer the modal choice, suggesting that the strong mixed option preference found in the trinary choice conditions is mainly due to a compromise effect. However, the binary choice probabilities did show violations of strong stochastic transitivity in a pattern that suggested a slight bias toward the mixed option. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

职业经理人问题的中国式解决——以富大集团为例

因公司管理权交付经理阶层而导致的管理经济的发展,提出了如何使管理层忠于公司利益的问题即“职业经理人问题”。这是西方也是中国公众公司都面临的难题。这问题是否能解决如何解决,也是我国民营企业极为关心的问题。上海富大集团公司在这方面做了令人感兴趣的尝试,他们立足中国国情和公司实践,创始了一种基于“好人文化”之上的选拔和培养经理人的办法,并尝试建立一种“新型的公私合营企业”,来解决管理层的铁心负责和忠诚问题。目前这一探索还在进行中,但它对上述世界性难题的研究和解决,具有值得重视的理论意义和现实意义。     

Democracy as a Way to Social Compromise

In modern society, democracy as a symbol of social civilization and progress is cherished. Any government or organization, whether truly democratic or not, will claim that it is democratic while its opponents are not. However, as a historical notion, democracy does not possess the quality of absoluteness. In my view, democracy, in its original meaning, should be understood as a way to social compromise, whose aim is to guarantee a relatively fair political life. Translated from New Eyesight, 2004(3) by Dong Lihe     

职业妥协：内涵、影响因素与实施效果

职业妥协是职业决策中的一个重要概念,关系着个体职业发展和社会就业的稳定。为了充分了解职业妥协和有效促进就业。首先,介绍了职业妥协的概念、测量;其次,总结了职业妥协的影响因素,并基于差异理论、目标设定理论、社会认知职业理论和人-环境匹配理论解释了职业妥协的实施效果,汇总了实施效果的边界条件;最后从职业妥协对职业行为的影响、个体职业生涯态度、家庭代际支持和上下级匹配与职业妥协的关系几个方面对未来研究进行了展望。     

Special issue preamble: Digit ratio (2D:4D) and individual differences research

The sexually differentiated second-to-fourth digit ratio (2D:4D) is currently frequently utilized in individual differences research as a putative indicator of the masculinizing brain organization effects of prenatal testosterone. This preamble introduces the journal special issue on this theme, entitled “Digit ratio (2D:4D) and individual differences research”. Notes regarding the background, history, and recent progress of 2D:4D research are provided, and the background of the special issue and the contents of its 11 research articles are briefly summarized.     

REFLECTIONS ON BEHAVIOR ANALYSIS AND EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY: A SELECTIVE REVIEW OF EVOLUTION SINCE DARWIN—THE FIRST 150 YEARS. EDITED BY M. A. BELL,D. J. FUTUYAMA,W. F. EANES, & J. S. LEVINTON

This review focuses on parallels between the selectionist sciences of evolutionary biology and behavior analysis. In selectionism, complex phenomena are interpreted as the cumulative products of relatively simple processes acting over time—natural selection in evolutionary biology and reinforcement in behavior analysis. Because evolutionary biology is the more mature science, an examination of the factors that led to the triumph of natural selection provides clues whereby reinforcement may achieve a similar fate in the science of behavior.     

Explaining Muslim Americans’ Opinions on Salient Issues

Despite numerous individual success stories of living the American dream, the Muslim American community still remains one of the most misunderstood and underrepresented minorities in the United States. This study investigates the views of this community by mapping and explaining members' investigates on a number of issues of social and political import. It shows that the issue attitudes of Muslim Americans are rather uniform on some social and non-social issues but very diverse on others. Moreover, it also shows that the differences of opinion that were uncovered can be explained by a variety of factors including a respondent's ethnic or national origin and how committed a respondent is to the practice of Islam, defined by the frequency of mosque attendance. While these results are temporally limited, they do show that this is a very diverse community and set a strong foundation for further quantitative and qualitative investigations of how Muslim Americans' religious practices, ethnic backgrounds, and socio-economic characteristics affect their essential social and political beliefs.     

What is at Issue in Argumentation? Judgment in the Hellenistic Doctrine of <Emphasis Type="Italic">Krinomenon</Emphasis>

This paper offers an account of the Hellnistic doctrine of krinomenon, elaborating on the idea of rhetoric’s restoration as a major tool of contemporary research and philosophical study. As opposed to theories of argumentation that identify judgment with its propositional version and establish legitimization on speaker-audience identity, failing to acknowledge difference and controversy, the doctrine of krinomenon focuses on the question posed, connecting rhetoric to judgment. The crucial difference from classical rhetoric lies in the concept of zētēma: In the doctrine of krinomenon, participants in a common inquiry are reasonable, while logos refers to judgment itself – not the audience. Whereas a proposition dismisses its own problematization, controversy, i.e. non-identity that gives meaning to utterances, is inscribed in krinomenon, which is the product of dialectic between contradictory utterances. Beyond the two opposite logics of dogmatism and relativism, difference in the doctrine of krinomenon is judgment’s very condition.     

Begging what is at issue in the argument

This paper objects to treating begging the question as circular reasoning. It argues that what is at issue in the argument is not to be confused with the claim or position that the arguer is adopting, and that logicians from Aristotle on give the wrong definition and have difficulty making sense of the fallacy because they try to define it in terms of how an argument is defined by logical theory - as a sequence consisting of premises followed by a conclusion. That the problematic about begging the question depends on treating an argument as a context-less sequence of statements seems to be anticipated by the pragma-dialectical approach. The paper offers a critique of this dialogical approach, as exemplified by Douglas Walton in his recent book on begging the question, on the grounds that it raises more problems than it solves. It concludes with the suggestion that what is really at issue in discussions of begging the question is the need for a theory of fallacy.