论公共管理中不道德手段的生成与控制

公共生活要得到有效而又合理的管理必须运用道德的手段。有的公共管理机构及其人员出于提高管理效率或者实现私人目的的考虑,可能会选择不道德的手段。由于不道德的手段会造成严重的道德后果,因此,就有必要对其予以合理控制。这种控制既需要合理的道德观念的支持,又需要刚性的内部控制与外部控制的配合。     

隔代“亲”的社会心理解析

隔代抚育中出现了普遍的隔代“亲”现象。本文分别从文化传统（血缘宗亲）、心理需求、社会现实、补偿心理等几个方面来阐述隔代“亲”的成因。     

视觉表象生成系统及其影响因素

视觉表象是在记忆基础上产生的类似知觉的信息表征, 也是人们在日常生活中不可或缺的心理活动之一。本综述介绍了该领域中比较有影响力的表象计算理论模型, 并进一步归纳了视觉表象生成系统的成分及其对应的神经基础。分析结果强调了初级视觉皮层作为“视觉缓冲器”是生成表象的主要机能结构, 以“视觉缓冲器”为基础的表象生成系统的机能受多重因素影响。本综述有助于对视觉表象生成系统形成全面的认识, 促进视觉表象实质的进一步研究。     

管理者权力距离对员工创造性观点产生与实施关系的调节作用

本研究考察了管理者的权力距离对于员工创造性观点产生与实施过程的调节作用。对170名企业员工和他们的直接主管的问卷调查结果表明：（1）管理者的权力距离对员工创造性观点的产生与实施的影响是不同的。管理者的高权力距离会抑制员工创造性观点的产生,但会促进员工创造性观点的实施。（2）管理者的高权力距离会促进员工创造性想法从产生向实施的转化。研究讨论了管理者的权力距离水平对于创新过程影响的实践意义。     

Productivity is not enough: A comparison of interactive and nominal brainstorming groups on idea generation and selection

The conclusion that nominal brainstorming groups outperform interactive brainstorming groups has been exclusively based on studies of idea generation. This study tested whether the productivity advantage of nominal groups would also result in better idea selection. Nominal and interactive groups performed a task that involved idea generation and selection. Idea generation and selection were strictly separated for half the groups, but were combined for the other half. Nominal groups generated more ideas than interactive groups, and the ideas generated by nominal groups were more original and less feasible than the ideas generated by interactive groups. However, there were no differences among conditions in quality of the selected ideas. Further, idea selection was not significantly better than chance. This suggests that high productivity in brainstorming is not sufficient to lead to better solutions.     

Empirical underidentification in estimating random utility models: The role of choice sets and standardizations

A standard approach to distinguishing people’s risk preferences is to estimate a random utility model using a power utility function to characterize the preferences and a logit function to capture choice consistency. We demonstrate that with often-used choice situations, this model suffers from empirical underidentification, meaning that parameters cannot be estimated precisely. With simulations of estimation accuracy and Kullback–Leibler divergence measures we examined factors that potentially mitigate this problem. First, using a choice set that guarantees a switch in the utility order between two risky gambles in the range of plausible values leads to higher estimation accuracy than randomly created choice sets or the purpose-built choice sets common in the literature. Second, parameter estimates are regularly correlated, which contributes to empirical underidentification. Examining standardizations of the utility scale, we show that they mitigate this correlation and additionally improve the estimation accuracy for choice consistency. Yet, they can have detrimental effects on the estimation accuracy of risk preference. Finally, we also show how repeated versus distinct choice sets and an increase in observations affect estimation accuracy. Together, these results should help researchers make informed design choices to estimate parameters in the random utility model more precisely.     

基于认知理论的测验编制技术—项目生成

传统测验重视统计技术,不重视测量结构的心理学意义,使得它的功能局限于筛选,不能提供更多的信息。由于认知心理学理论、心理计量学以及计算机技术的发展,使得基于认知理论指导下的项目生成技术逐渐成熟。该文从项目生成的概念、方法,及研究的意义和难点等方面对项目生成技术作了一个简要述评,以期推进我国认知心理学与心理测量学相结合的研究工作。     

How probability theory explains the conjunction fallacy

The conjunction fallacy occurs when people judge a conjunctive statement B‐and‐A to be more probable than a constituent B, in contrast to the law of probability that P(B ∧ A) cannot exceed P(B) or P(A). Researchers see this fallacy as demonstrating that people do not follow probability theory when judging conjunctive probability. This paper shows that the conjunction fallacy can be explained by the standard probability theory equation for conjunction if we assume random variation in the constituent probabilities used in that equation. The mathematical structure of this equation is such that random variation will be most likely to produce the fallacy when one constituent has high probability and the other low, when there is positive conditional support between the constituents, when there are two rather than three constituents, and when people rank probabilities rather than give numerical estimates. The conjunction fallacy has been found to occur most frequently in exactly these situations. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.