抑郁症的流行病学研究与预防——读《中国人群死亡及其危险因素流行水平、趋势和分布》有感

根据《中国人群死亡及其危险因素流行水平、趋势和发布》的报告和相关研究表明,全世界约有1亿人患有抑郁症,且数量有增无减,抑郁症将成为本世纪一种相当流行的病症.由于抑郁症是一种患病率高,严重危害人类身心健康,具有高自杀风险的精神疾病,更需要我们采取措施积极预防.目前采用的主要预防方法有:积极的心理健康教育、处理好家庭与社会的关系、社会支持、心理调适和体育锻炼等.     

Risk perception in Taiwan

In a questionnaire study, 51 Taiwanese college students were asked to judge 48 natural and human-made hazards on nine risk characteristics. Another group of 61 students were asked to rate the magnitude of 80 hazards and their attitudes toward these hazards. To evaluate the dimensionality of risk perception, participants' ratings for the nine risk characteristics were analyzed using Profile Analysis via Multidimensional Scaling approach. Two dimensions of risk perception were identified: (i) Involuntary versus Immediate Effect; and (ii) Delayed Effect versus Known to Science and Chronic. The relationships of risk perceptions and perceived public and private responsibilities in risk management were examined. Catastrophic, certain-to-be-fatal, dreaded, and uncontrollable risks were perceived as more deserving of public risk management, while controllable risks that were known to science, known to those exposed, and chronic were perceived as more deserving of private management. In particular, diseases are perceived as most deserving of private risk management and least deserving of public risk management; and technologies are perceived as most deserving of public risk management and least deserving of private risk management.     

Cogency in Motion: Critical Contextualism and Relevance

If arguments are to generate public knowledge, as in the sciences, then they must travel, finding acceptance across a range of local contexts. But not all good arguments travel, whereas some bad arguments do. Under what conditions may we regard the capacity of an argument to travel as a sign of its cogency or public merits? This question is especially interesting for a contextualist approach that wants to remain critically robust: if standards of cogency are bound to local contexts of evaluation, then how may arguments legitimately travel at all? The key to a contextualist conception of cogent travel, I argue, lies in the way local contexts are linked to broader contexts of evaluation by relations of relevance. The burden of the article is to elaborate the different forms these relations can take in the travel of scientific arguments.     

Delay, Probability, and Social Discounting in A Public Goods Game

A human social discount function measures the value to a person of a reward to another person at a given social distance. Just as delay discounting is a hyperbolic function of delay, and probability discounting is a hyperbolic function of odds-against, social discounting is a hyperbolic function of social distance. Experiment 1 obtained individual social, delay, and probability discount functions for a hypothetical $75 reward; participants also indicated how much of an initial $100 endowment they would contribute to a common investment in a public good. Steepness of discounting correlated, across participants, among all three discount dimensions. However, only social and probability discounting were correlated with the public-good contribution; high public-good contributors were more altruistic and also less risk averse than low contributors. Experiment 2 obtained social discount functions with hypothetical $75 rewards and delay discount functions with hypothetical $1,000 rewards, as well as public-good contributions. The results replicated those of Experiment 1; steepness of the two forms of discounting correlated with each other across participants but only social discounting correlated with the public-good contribution. Most participants in Experiment 2 predicted that the average contribution would be lower than their own contribution.     

Overblocking autonomy: the case of mandatory library filtering software

In U.S. v. American Library Association (2003), the Supreme Court upheld the Child Internet Protection Act (CIPA), which mandated that libraries receiving federal funding for public Internet access install content-filtering programs on computers which provide that access. These programs analyze incoming content, and block the receipt of objectionable material, in particular pornography. Thus, patrons at public libraries are protected from unintentionally (or intentionally) accessing objectionable material, and, in the case of minors, from accessing potentially damaging material. At least, that is the official story. In this paper, I develop three points. (1) I argue that CIPA and ALA are better read as examples of the enforcement of a regime of normative sexuality. The question of minors accessing pornography is only relevant to the official story insofar as it provides a rhetorically persuasive example of deviance from that normative regime. CIPAs full target includes information about topics such as homosexuality and contraception. (2) Rather than (or in addition to) punishing deviances directly, CIPA attempts to constitute a “public” in which such deviancy can never occur in the first place. Hence, the designation of a “public” space serves to domesticate alternative sexualities and to sanitize that space of sexual difference. (3) This interaction at the border of the public and private spheres offers an opportunity to reflect on and underscore the ways that subject formation and subjectivity are mediated through technological artifacts like the Internet.

Public Space

“Public space” is the space where individuals see and are seen by others as they engage in public affairs. Hannah Arendt links this space with “public freedom.” The being of such freedom, she asserts, depends on its appearing. It consists of “deeds and words which are meant to appear, whose very existence hinges on appearance.” Such appearance, however, requires the public space. Reflecting on Arendt’s remarks, a number of questions arise: What does the dependence of freedom on public space tell us about the nature of freedom? How does public freedom relate to the freedom of a private individual? Does the latter also depend on its appearing? Which is generatively prior: freedom or public space, i.e., the actions that publicly manifest freedom or the space required for their appearance? How does public power shape this space? In this article, I approach these questions through a phenomenological study of public space.     

Which type of leader do I support in step‐level public good dilemmas? The roles of level of threshold and trust

The present research examined the moderating effect of the level of threshold on people's preferences for different leader types in step-level public good dilemmas. It was assumed that the primary focus of people in step-level public good dilemmas is to make sure that the group surpasses the threshold. Consequently, when the level of threshold is difficult to reach people are expected to provide more support for and cooperate with a leader that monitors and controls the contributions made toward the public good. However, if the threshold is easy to surpass people will focus more on whether the obtained public good or bonus will be distributed according to agreements, suggesting that people will provide more support to and cooperate with a leader that monitors and controls the distribution of the bonus. These predictions were confirmed across two experiments using a step-level public good paradigm with a dichotomous (Study 1) and a continuous (Study 2) contribution choice. Moreover, the results also revealed that perceptions of trust accounted, in part, for the effect of level of threshold on people's leadership preferences.     

Public Discourse: Creating the Conditions for Dialogue Concerning the Common Good in a Postmodern Heterogeneous Democracy

This paper offers a philosophical `history' of the nature of`public discourse' – a basic element of human rights. It beginswith Enlightenment views from Condorcet and Jefferson, turns to Dewey,and then to Habermas. Over a couple of centuries not only does thecentral character of discourse change but so too does the definition ofa public person.     

A Debate on the Ethics of Aging: Does the Concept of Autonomy Provide a Sufficient Framework for Aging Policy?

This article presents a debate on the issue of autonomy in aging policy held at the 1994 annual meeting of the American Society on Aging held in San Francisco, California. Harry R. Moody, director of the Institute for Human Values in Aging at Hunter College, supports a reconceptualized notion of personal autonomy which focuses on issues of power, theory, and practice, and finds conflicts between autonomy and justice in the lived world of the elderly and disabled. In aging policy, he promotes an emphasis on social movements such as Hospice rather than on autonomy of individuals. He suggests alternatives to extreme paternalism or complete autonomy, such as a communicative ethics approach. Larry Polivka, director of the Florida Policy Exchange Center on Aging at the University of South Florida, affirms that policy for the aging and disabled should be based ona commitment to autonomy. He describes an integrated model for long-term care that places autonomy first and includes features of communicative ethics and the negotiated consent and virtues models of ethics.     

流动儿童的压力和社会支持状况及社会支持保护作用的研究

对流动儿童的领悟社会支持状况以及流动儿童的社会支持在压力与心理适应之间的关系中是否起调节作用进行了探索。给334名流动儿童和237名城市儿童及其家长施测青少年生活事件量表（ASLEC）、领悟社会支持量表（PSSS）和Achenbach儿童行为量表（家长版）（CBCL）。结果发现,流动儿童的领悟社会支持得分显著低于城市儿童,层次多元回归分析的结果表明,社会支持在压力与心理适应之间的关系中起调节作用,表明社会支持对流动儿童的心理适应起保护作用。