从我国现行法律看安乐死的实施

安乐死作为自然人在特殊情况下对自己生命自主选择的权利,涉及人的生命权益,有关生命权立法是安乐死问题的关键.安乐死的实施与我国现行法律对生命权的严格维护产生冲突,需要我国用法律的形式肯定安乐死,并对现行法律做出适当调整,为安乐死立法留下法律空间.     

Is A Purely First Person Account Of Human Action Defensible?

There are two perspectives available from which to understand an agent's intention in acting. The first is the perspective of the acting agent: what did she take to be her end, and the means necessary to achieve that end? The other is a third person perspective that is attentive to causal or conceptual relations: was some causal outcome of the agent's action sufficiently close, or so conceptually related, to what the agent did that it should be considered part of her intention? Recent goods based views in ethics are divided as to whether only the first person perspective, or a mix of both perspectives, are necessary to understand intention and action. But resolution of the issue is necessary if goods based views are to be able to deploy to principle of double effect; for that principle requires an account of how to distinguish what is genuinely a matter of intention in human action from what is not. I argue that the pure first person account is better than the mixed account.     

“Everybody knows it’s true”: Social dominance orientation and right-wing authoritarianism moderate false consensus for stereotypic beliefs

European American university students (N = 89) judged the percentage of African Americans who possess 16 traits (e.g., poor, violent, and emotionally expressive) and then estimated how other students would make the same judgments. Participants also completed measures of social dominance orientation (SDO) and right-wing authoritarianism (RWA). Individuals with both high SDO and high RWA held the least positive views of African Americans. False consensus emerged in the form of a significant positive average within-person partial correlation between participants’ own ratings and their judgments of how other students would respond, controlling for the actual responses of other students. False consensus was positively related to SDO and a significant SDO × RWA interaction indicated that false consensus was highest for participants with both high SDO and high RWA. Results suggest that hierarchy-legitimizing beliefs in the form of stereotypes may be sustained internally through false consensus, especially among those most prone to prejudice.     

妊娠期肝内胆汁淤积症研究中的因果论

妊娠期肝内胆汁淤积症是一种常见的妊娠晚期并发症,对围产儿的危害极大,其确切的病因及发病机制尚未十分清楚。只有了解了疾病的起因,才能更好地进行防治。凡病必有其因,以果推因,再取因治果,这是典型的因果论的应用。     

熟悉与陌生品牌启动效应的实验研究

本研究应用任务分离法对熟悉品牌和陌生品牌启动效应年龄特征进行研究,结果发现大学生被试外显成绩高于内隐成绩,且两者有显著差异。进而再采用二次比较法同样以大学生为被试,对熟悉品牌启动效应进行实验,结果表明:(1)学习前带符号组与不带符号组的成绩之间都有极其显著的差异,学习后带符号组与不带符号组之间也有极其显著差异;带符号与不带符号的两组学习前后的成绩均有极其显著的差异;在二次比较法的应用过程中我们发现:(2)如果学习前后的被试为同一组,则会产生“学习污染”。以陌生品牌为材料,用二次比较法在老、青、少三组被进行实验,并将三个年龄段的被试随机分成两组:学习前组(A)和学习后组(B),结果显示:(3)陌生品牌中存在着启动效应,不同年龄段的消费者外显记忆有差异,但内隐记忆没有差异。     

内隐学习在第二语言语音学习中的作用

本研究以大学生为被试,用符合德语读音规则的人造无意义单词(含4~5个音素)为刺激材料,采用强分离程序———匹配和编辑,并增设时间变量,比较了在先匹配后编辑,先编辑后匹配,只匹配,只编辑4种不同内隐、外显学习方式下被试对语音规则的掌握。结果表明,语音学习中存在内隐学习的优势效应,内隐与外显结合的学习方式最好。此外,实验证实了语音的内隐学习也存在长时效应。     

推理的再认启发模式研究

采用“高校配对比较任务”和“城市配对比较任务”检验Goldstein等2002年提出的推理的再认启发模型,结果证明:人们在相关信息不足、知识和时间都有限的情况下,采用再认启发策略进行推理的比率相当高,并且出现了“少即是多”效应。本研究还探讨了Goldstein等没有考虑的因素,结果发现:在压力作用下,人们仍然会采用再认启发策略进行推理;再认启发中被试会运用无关信息进行推理;在操作时间上也会出现“少即是多”效应。     

中外两种推理理论的实验比较研究

通过两个实验对中国学者提出的“推理题与推理者的推理知识双重结构模型”和Evans提出的“双重加工理论”进行了实验比较研究。实验一通过两种评定方法对相应性质命题进行评定后所得实验结果表明Evans等(1983)有关“信念效应”研究中的“结论可信性”变量可以视为与胡竹菁等(1996)实验中的“内容正确性”变量是同一性质的变量; 实验二根据“形式正确性”和“内容正确性”两个自变量设计的推理实验结果与Evans等(1983)的研究结果基本一致; 但增加“内容熟悉性”这一自变量设计的推理实验结果表明“推理题与推理者的推理知识双重结构模型”比Evans提出的“双重加工理论”能更好地解释推理者对性质三段论的推理结果。     

Uninformative Anchors Have Persistent Effects on Valuation Judgments

Anchoring effects influence a wide range of numeric judgments, including valuation judgments, such as willingness‐to‐pay (WTP). However, prior research has not established whether anchoring only temporarily distorts responses or exerts persistent influence on preferences. This article presents three incentive compatible experiments examining the long‐term effects of random anchoring on WTP. Study 1 evaluated the persistence of anchoring effects over long durations, and showed that the strength of the effect decayed but did not disappear completely even 8 weeks later. In Study 2, a random anchor significantly influenced WTP after one week, regardless of whether WTP was also elicited immediately following the anchoring procedure, showing that consistency motivations do not account for persistence of anchoring effects. Study 3 showed relatively low anchors resulted in more stable valuations, compared with participants who reported WTP with no anchoring procedure. Together with the pattern of decay over time in Study 1, this suggests that anchoring facilitates the “imprinting” of valuation judgments for later retrieval. These studies show that anchoring effects can lead to lasting changes in valuation judgments, providing the first demonstration of long‐term persistence of constructed preferences as a result of an uninformative and arbitrary manipulation.