学校组织气氛对教师工作倦怠的影响

问卷调查了410名北京市中学教师,探讨了学校组织气氛对教师工作倦怠的影响。结果发现:教师的工作倦怠没有性别、是否班主任、年龄、任课班级数量、学生人数、周任课时数上的差别。在职称和婚姻因素上有明显的差别,玩世不恭维度上,高级职称的教师工作倦怠明显高于中教一级和中教二级教师,中教一级和中教二级教师之间的工作倦怠没有显著差异,单身教师的情绪衰竭和成就感低落比己婚教师明显偏高。在控制了人口统计学变量之后,分层回归和优势分析发现:支持行为和限制行为能显著预测情绪衰竭,限制行为的贡献更大;支持行为、监督行为、限制行为和同事行为能显著预测玩世不恭,支持行为的贡献更大;支持行为、同事行为和疏远行为能显著预测成就感低落,同事行为的贡献更大;亲密行为对情绪衰竭、玩世不恭和成就感低落没有预测作用。     

权力距离感对公平感与组织公民行为关系的调节作用研究

本文以188名企业员工及其同事为被试,运用问卷调查法和分层回归分析的统计方法考察了权力距离对公平感与组织公民行为之间关系的调节作用。结果发现:权力距离可以正向调节程序公平与同事评价OCB-I、OCB-G和OCB-O之间的关系,即权力距离感越强,则程序公平感与同事评价OCB-I、OCB-G和OCB-O之间的相关越强。     

和谐伦理精神探析

和谐社会是一种和而不同的动态的理性社会,它需要一种全新的和谐伦理精神来支撑。这种和谐伦理精神主要体现在公平正义、诚信友爱、尊重自然等三个方面。公平正义是构建社会主义和谐社会制度的首要美德;诚信友爱是协调和谐人际关系的道德基石;尊重自然是实现人与自然和谐相处的生态伦理精神。这三种伦理精神的统一体现了社会、人和自然的统一。     

科技伦理责任功效探微

高科技发展所带来的伦理问题引发了社会对于科技伦理责任的关注。本文主要对科技伦理责任功效问题进行探讨,指出科技伦理责任能够提供科技进步的精神动力,引导科技行为的道德选择,影响科技主体的价值信念。同时,分析了科技伦理责任功效的实现基础,即观念、态度、动力和控制四大系统。     

亲子鉴定:科技维护家庭伦理存在的道德悖论

亲子鉴定对于维护家庭应有的婚姻观念和伦理关系的积极意义是不言而喻的;但同时也带来一系列需要引起注意的新问题,如强化了男子亲权的意义而忽视了女子亲权的意义、强化性关系的生理和血缘伦理意义而弱化了性关系的社会伦理意义,容易因诱发和助长夫妻间的不信任情绪而导致婚姻和家庭信任危机等;因此,国家和社会应当对亲子鉴定进行必要的引导和限制。     

A survey on adverse incidents in legal psychology studies: Reflections on ethics review

Ethics committees (ECs) regulate research activities to maintain research participants' autonomy and to protect them from harm and injury. No research to date attempted to establish how much risk is involved in social‐science research. Using a survey approach, we set out to estimate the risk of being involved in an incident for research participants in legal psychology and assessed researchers' views of ECs. Fifty‐nine of 188 respondents (31%) stated that they had experienced one or more incidents with a participant. The estimated risk of being involved in an incident was one to three per 10,000 participants, which according to biomedical standards defines a rare risk. Although some researchers were satisfied with their EC, the general tenor was one of discontent due to conservative decision‐making, lacking expertise, and overstepping demands. Whether ECs succeed in protecting participants from loss of autonomy, harm and injury are unknown but are open to empirical research.     

An Excess of Excellence: Aristotelian Supererogation and the Degrees of Virtue

In this paper, I argue for an Aristotelian way of accommodating supererogation within virtue ethics by retrieving an account of moral heroism and providing a picture of different degrees of virtue. This, I claim, is the most appropriate virtue-ethical background allowing us to talk about supererogation without falling prey to several dangers. After summarizing the main attempts to deny the compatibility of virtue and supererogation, I will present some recent proposals to accommodate supererogation within virtue ethics. Next, I will argue that these proposals raise substantial worries. I will then offer an analysis of heroism and the degrees of virtue to outline my own alternative definition of supererogation in terms of heroic virtue.     

Bentham on animal welfare

Jeremy Bentham is often thought to have set the groundwork for the modern ‘animal liberation’ movement, but in fact he wrote little on the subject. A full examination of his work reveals a less radical position than that commonly attributed to him. Bentham was the first Western philosopher to grant animals equal consideration from within a comprehensive, non-religious moral theory, and he was a staunch defender of animal welfare laws. But he also approved of killing and using animals, as long as pointless cruelty could be avoided. The nuances of his position are best brought out by comparing it to that of Peter Singer, who draws considerably more radical practical conclusions. This is not primarily explained by competing formulations of utilitarianism, however, but by different empirical background assumptions about the lives of animals.     

心理学研究中的伦理

本文介绍了美国心理学会关于科学研究的伦理原则和相关的规定,以及结合心理学科研实践讨论怎样实施这些原则与规定。本文对我国心理学的伦理建设有一定参考价值。主要内容如下:1.人类参与的研究; a.知情同意及欺骗; b.自由退出; c.保护免受伤害和事后情况说明; d.清除有害后果; e.保密。2.动物研究的伦理:a.反对研究动物的论点; b.赞成研究动物的论点。c.研究动物的指南。3.科学欺诈。4.监督伦理实践。     

Salomon Maimon’s Attempt at a New Presentation of the Principle of Morality and a New Deduction of Its Reality1

This essay is a translation of one of Salomon Maimon’s ethical writings, accompanied by a brief introduction. In it, Maimon proposes a correction of the Kantian moral principle of duty, as it is articulated both by Kant’s Groundwork for a Metaphysics of Morals and his Critique of Practical Reason. In particular, Maimon’s essay reveals the influence of Reinhold’s critique of Kant’s moral philosophy, especially regarding the role of incentives behind moral action. It reveals as well Maimon’s commitment to the primacy of the theoretical over the practical, drawn from his reading of Maimonides and Spinoza. The essay, therefore, marks an important moment in the development of Maimon’s assimilation of Kantian philosophy, one often neglected in scholarship on his work.