Behavioral genetics and development: Historical and conceptual causes of controversy

Traditional, quantitative behavioral geneticists and developmental psychobiologists such as Gilbert Gottlieb have long debated what it would take to create a truly developmental behavioral genetics. These disputes have proven so intractable that disputants have repeatedly suggested that the problem rests on their opponents’ conceptual confusion; whilst others have argued that the intractability results from the non-scientific, political motivations of their opponents. The authors provide a different explanation of the intractability of these debates. They show that the disputants have competing interpretations of the concepts of reaction norm, genotype–environment interaction, and gene. The common thread that underlies each of these disagreements, the authors argue, is the relevance of potential variation that is not manifest in any actual population to the understanding of development.     

Contribution du modèle du comportement planifié à la prédiction de l’entrée en formation professionnelle

The research analysis various factors of the commitment in professional training by a model inspired of the theory of planned behavior (Ajzen, 1985). A sample of 127 adults having to start a professional training cycle has answered questionnaires relating to the selected model, sociobiographic, attitudinal and contextual variables. Moreover, effective behavior (entry/non-entry in the session) was taken into account. On the whole of the sample, 60,6% actually integrated the forcasted training course . The major results show that the model of the planned behavior is relevant insofar as the intensity of the intention predicts the behavior of integration. Various dimensions of the model act in differentiated ways: some of them explain the intention of entry in training course and others explain the effective behavior.     

反馈相关负波与社会关系认知

反馈相关负波(feedback-related negativity, FRN)是人类进行结果评价时诱发的一个重要的脑电负成分, 出现在反馈刺激后200~300ms间。作为社会认知研究的可视化指标和工具, 它在社会关系认知中有着十分重要的作用。研究从社会关系与反映并表征社会关系的社会规范两方面阐述了反馈相关负波在社会关系认知中的作用。前者着重阐述了反馈相关负波在作为独立个体所扮演的社会角色和人际关系中的作用, 后者主要介绍了反馈相关负波在分配公平和责任规范中的作用。未来研究需进一步联合其他脑电成分(如P300), 采用更严密的实验设计和研究范式来探讨不同人际亲密度个体在责任分摊过程中的认知神经过程及其在独立担责情况下责任绝对额度对其结果评价和社会关系认知的影响。     

Integrating five-factor model facet-level traits with the theory of planned behavior and exercise

ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to examine direct, indirect, and moderating links between facet-level personality traits of the five-factor model, the theory of planned behavior (TPB) constructs [Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179–211.], and exercise behavior.DesignCross-sectional.MethodUniversity students (N = 507) completed the NEO-PI-R [Costa, P. T., McCrae, R. R. (1992). The NEO-PI-R personality inventory: Professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.], the Leisure-time Exercise Questionnaire [Godin, G., Shephard, R. J. (1985). A simple method to assess exercise behavior in the community. Canadian Journal of Applied Sport Science, 10, 141–146.], and measures assessing the TPB constructs.ResultsPreliminary analysis revealed the extraversion and conscientiousness facet-level traits of activity and self-discipline respectively were independent predictors of exercise behavior. An integrated structural model with both facet-level traits revealed that 46% of the variance in exercise behavior and 70% of the variance in intention was explained. Significant indirect effects of activity and self-discipline and the TPB constructs of affective attitude, instrumental attitude, and subjective norm, on exercise behavior through intention and perceived behavioral control were also observed. Finally, the anxiety facet trait of neuroticism significantly moderated the intention–behavior relationship.ConclusionsOur findings showed that the facet-level personality traits of activity and self-discipline are important motivational variables that link the TPB constructs to exercise behavior. Future research that integrates personality with the TPB within experimental interventions is warranted.     

Effects of norms and norm-violations on inhibition and instigation of aggression

It was hypothesized that in a competitive interaction in which an opponent first used threats and fines a) subjects would use the highest level of coercion that could be justified by the available norms, b) subjects would be inhibited by a norm that justified using only low levels of coercion, but c) when the opponent used a magnitude of coercion which exceeded the norm, subjects would also violate the norm and retaliate with an equally high magnitude of coercion, and d) subjects would use the maximum levels of coercion when engaging in a competitive game without norms. These hypotheses were examined in a 3 × 2 factorial experiment in which the amount of coercion allowable by a norm (Low Norm, High Norm, and No Information) and the level of coercion (Low or High) were manipulated. As predicted, aggressive reactions by subjects were inhibited when the provoker conformed to a low norm by using a low level of coercion. On the other hand, subjects retaliated by using a high level of coercion when the level of coercion used by a provoker violated the norm. Subjects who could justify their behavior by the availability of a high punitive norm tended to use all of the coercive power available to them even when the provoker used a low level of coercion. © 1996 Wiley-Liss, Inc.     

文化常模和目标调节模型:两种幸福感文化观

随着世界经济的发展,人们物资生活水平的提高,如何提高生活质量这一问题引起了越来越多的关注。20世纪60年代后期,主观幸福感(SWB)的研究逐步在全世界范围内形成热潮。近年来,幸福感属性中的文化差异引起了跨文化研究者的极大兴趣。文章通过比较SWB跨文化研究中新近出现的两个理论模型——文化常模模型和目标调节模型,探讨了文化在SWB产生过程中的作用,并在此基础上分析了情绪性幸福感和生活意义之间的关系。     

Knowledge,reasoning, and deliberation

Epistemologists have become increasingly interested in the practical role of knowledge. One prominent principle, which I call PREMISE, states that if you know that p, then you are justified in using p as a premise in your reasoning. In response, a number of critics have proposed a variety of counter-examples. In order to evaluate these problem cases, we need to consider the broader context in which this principle is situated by specifying in greater detail the types of activity that the principle governs. I argue that if PREMISE is interpreted as governing deductive reasoning, then the examples lose their force. In addition, I consider the cases, discussed by Keith DeRose, where the subject is in more than one practical context at the same time. In order to account for these latter cases, we need to further specify the scope of PREMISE. I distinguish two ways of understanding PREMISE, as a knowledge-action principle and as a knowledge-deliberation principle. I conclude by arguing for the knowledge-deliberation version of the principle and by exploring what this principle says about the practical role of knowledge.     

“仁者”还是“智者”：第三方惩罚对惩罚者声誉的影响

第三方惩罚会对惩罚者的声誉产生显著影响, 然而就影响的方向而言, 现有文献给出了不同答案。上述问题的一个潜在原因是先前研究未能区分声誉的不同维度以及惩罚的不同动机与形式。通过将温暖-能力双维度结构引入惩罚者的声誉, 实验结果显示, 第三方惩罚从总体上降低了人们对惩罚者在温暖维度上的评价而提高了对其在能力维度上的评价。调节效应分析表明, 动机被归因为集体聚焦的惩罚进一步提升了其对能力的正面作用而减缓了对温暖的负面作用, 并且惩罚者的合作水平越高, 其动机被归因为集体聚焦的程度也越高。针对不同惩罚形式的进一步分析显示, 当惩罚动机被归因为个体聚焦时, 经济惩罚对温暖的负面作用显著高于社会惩罚, 而在集体聚焦的归因下经济惩罚对能力的正面作用显著低于社会惩罚。     

主观规范对大学生志愿者志愿工作投入的影响机制研究——一个链式双重中介模型

志愿工作投入直接影响志愿服务活动运转的效果,对大学生志愿者的志愿工作投入影响机制展开研究。基于计划行为理论、自我决定理论和角色认同理论,构建了以主观规范为自变量、大学生志愿工作投入为因变量、角色认同和志愿服务激情为中介变量的一个链式双重中介模型。通过对330名大学生志愿者进行问卷调查,采用层次回归和Bootstrap检验方法对问卷数据进行模型检验。研究结果表明：主观规范对大学生志愿者志愿工作投入有正向积极的影响,这种影响是通过角色认同和志愿服务激情传递的,志愿服务激情的中介效应更强;角色认同和志愿服务激情在主观规范对志愿工作投入的影响机制中起着链式双重中介作用。研究为大学生志愿服务领域相关工作提供了理论指导。     

Testimony and the Constitutive Norm of Assertion

Abstract

I can, given the right conditions, transmit my knowledge to you by telling you some information. If I know the time, and if all goes well, I can bring it about that you know it too. If conditions are right, all I have to do is assert to you what time it is. Paradigmatically, speakers use assertions to transmit what they know to their hearers. Clearly, assertion and testimony are tightly connected. The nature of this connection, however, is not so clear. According to many accounts, assertion has an epistemic constitutive norm. This norm appears to be able to account for some important features of testimony: first, testimonial knowledge transmission, second, the reliability of testimony, and third, the epistemic rights exchanged in cases of testimony. In this paper, however, I argue against this apparent ability. The constitutive norm of assertion, I argue, plays no role in accounts of testimonial knowledge transmission, or of the epistemic rights that testimony confers. This is especially clear when we consider the general norms to which we’re held. Epistemological accounts of testimony can and should, therefore, avoid the difficult debate over the constitutive norm of assertion.