群体健康与关系“正义”

生命伦理学具有广泛性和综合性,着眼于群体健康是当前生命伦理学发展的趋势。在群体水平的生命伦理学的研究中,有关“正义”的概念是核心的问题。涛慕思·W·博格提出了正义的“关系概念”,借以考察范围广泛的社会制度与健康结果的产生具有什么样的因果关系,进而强调社会制度的制定者和支持者对其产生的健康结果负有责任。通过对此“关系概念”进行分析,以期对中国国内健康领域问题的解决有所启示。     

The paradox of the disrespected: Disrespected group members’ engagement in group-serving efforts

Previous research has demonstrated that intra-group respect can strengthen people’s group identification, and encourage them to exert themselves on behalf of their group. In the present contribution, we focus on the possibility that those who are not respected by other group members (i.e., the disrespected) can also display group beneficial behavior. Experiment 1 (N = 159) confirms this paradoxical premise and reveals that systematically disrespected group members indeed exert themselves on group-serving tasks. These findings were replicated in Experiment 2 (N = 110). Additional indicators in Experiment 2 demonstrate that the effort by systematically disrespected group members cannot be attributed to a desire to improve their acceptance in the group, but should be interpreted as attempts to assert the worth of the self separately from the group. Results are discussed in relation to the group-value model and insights on marginal group membership and social exclusion.     

组织公平文献综述及未来的研究方向

文章的主要目的在于回顾组织公平自其产生至今的主要文献,并介绍Colquitt(2001)的组织公平四因素结构(即分配公平、程序公平、人际公平和信息公平)[1]。文章还讨论了组织公平的工具性和非工具性模型。最后,文章介绍了组织公平今后的几个研究方向。     

基于愿望的儿童特质因果理解研究

本研究采用测验法,随机抽取60名42-93个月的儿童为被试,考察他们基于愿望的特质因果理解能力。结果显示:(1)从42个月起,儿童就可以根据特质信息进行行为预测和情绪预测,且随年龄增长,预测水平有显著提高;(2)儿童理解愿望的主观性是儿童进行情绪预测的前提。     

Forming and reacting to overall fairness: A cross-cultural comparison

This study compared the cross-cultural formation and reactions toward overall fairness perception of employees from the US, China, Korea, and Japan. Distributive justice was related to overall fairness less strongly for Americans and Japanese than for Chinese and Koreans. In contrast, interactional justice was related to overall fairness more strongly for Americans and Japanese than for Chinese and Koreans. As expected, materialism seems to provide a coherent account of these cultural differences. In addition, overall fairness showed a stronger effect on turnover intention for Americans than for Chinese and Koreans. For job satisfaction, the effect of overall fairness was stronger for Americans than for Chinese, Koreans, and Japanese. Power distance seems to provide an adequate account of these cultural differences.     

论丹尼尔斯医疗保健公正理论

诺曼·丹尼尔斯将罗尔斯的正义理论应用到医疗资源分配公正领域,他的理论认为医疗保健的道德重要性就在于它保护正常的功能从而保护机会,平等机会不仅提供医疗保健权利的基础,它也帮助我们确定这个权利的承诺限度。此外我们应该依靠公平的程序达到医疗保健公正的分配。     

What determines people’s fairness judgments? Identification and outcomes influence procedural justice evaluations under uncertainty

When the procedures people experience are uncertain, factors unrelated to principles of procedural justice may nevertheless shape procedural justice judgments. This paper investigates two of these factors: an individual’s level of social identification with the group enacting the procedures and the outcomes associated with the procedure. It was predicted and found that high (vs. low) levels of identification promote relatively positive perceptions of procedural justice. It was also predicted and found that desirable (vs. undesirable) outcomes promote relatively positive perceptions of procedural justice. These effects only emerged in the absence of direct information indicating whether procedures were (un)fair. By showing an influence of identification and outcomes on procedural justice judgments under conditions of informational uncertainty, these studies provide important experimental evidence that integrates and extends previous research on justice, identity, and uncertainty to understand subjective evaluations of process fairness.     

A Just Global Economy: In Defense of Rawls

In The Law of Peoples, John Rawls does not discuss justice and the global economy at great length or in great detail. What he does say has not been well-received. The prevailing view seems to be that what Rawls says in The Law of Peoples regarding global economic justice is both inconsistent with and a betrayal of his own liberal egalitarian commitments, an unexpected and unacceptable defense of the status quo. This view is, I think, mistaken. Rawls’s position on global or international economic justice is richer, more nuanced, and generally more compelling than his critics have been willing to acknowledge. My aim in this essay is to sympathetically set out, and then defend against two common families of objection to, Rawls’s position on global or international economic justice. Objections of the first sort reject Rawls’s position as inadequately attentive to the material and economic interests of individual persons worldwide. Objections of the second sort reject it as inadequately attentive to the material and economic interests of well-ordered peoples. Throughout the paper I develop several arguments implicit in The Law of Peoples but not well-developed there as well as offer some additional arguments of my own consistent with the spirit of The Law of Peoples and Rawls’s work more generally. I conclude with some brief remarks expressing two worries I have about Rawls’s position – one concerning global public goods, the other concerning the formation of a morally adequate and effective political will within the international context under contemporary conditions. I wish to thank Alyssa Bernstein, Allen Buchanan, Samuel Freeman, John Hardwig, John Mandle, Rex Martin, Jim Nickel, Walter Riker, Kok-Chor Tan, and Leif Wenar for helpful comments or instructive conversation regarding earlier drafts of this paper.     

不同卷入度人群的组织公平结构

以国家助学金分配为背景,选取755名大学生为被试,运用量表测量和验证性因素分析办法考察不同卷入度人群的组织公平维度结构.结果表明:不同卷入程度个体的组织公平维度不一致.卷入程度低和卷入程度高但同时作为分配者的个体的组织公平是三因素结构.卷入程度高且只作为接受分配者的组织公平是四因素结构.同时,指出了信息公平在组织公平中具有重要的作用.     

No more than Conjectures: Popper and the Ethics of Scientific Enterprise

Karl Popper dealt with both problems Yurevich (Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 43(2), 2009, doi: 10.1007/s12124-008-9082-7) deals: the crisis in Psychology and in the discourse about the nature of science. Although he failed to provide a complete response for both problems, his proposals can yet be fruitful to the reflection on these matters in the context of the present discussion. He offers some tentative answers to what could be considered a healthy epistemic activity, something Yurevich does not provide. More interestingly, some of the Popper proposals seem to fit, and in some extent correct, the quest for “collaborative work” proposed by Zittoun et al. (Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 43(2), 2009, doi: 10.1007/s12124-008-9082-7) as a way of transforming crisis in development.