Should the behavioral sciences become more pragmatic? The case for functional contextualism in research on human behavior

Although societal need for behavioral science research is enormous, current research practices seem to be inefficient vehicles for producing knowledge that guides practical action. Many of our most popular theories provide little direct guidance for application. They focus on the development of models of the relationships among organismic events such as attitudes, self-efficacy expectations, and behavior, but pay little or no attention to the contextual influences on behavior. Such research is in keeping with a long-standing mechanistic tradition in psychology. We propose a version of contextualism as an alternative paradigm for the behavioral sciences. According to this paradigm, theories and research are evaluated in terms of their contribution to the prediction and influence of behavior. Basic research organized to pursue this goal has a direct bearing on how behavioral phenomena can be changed for practical purposes. Conversely, applied research contributes to basic understanding of the determinants of psychological phenomena.     

The Role of Apparent Constraints in Normative Reasoning: a Methodological Statement and Application to Global Justice

The assumptions that are made about the features of the world that are relatively changeable by agents and those that are not (constraints) play a central role in determining normative conclusions. In this way, normative reasoning is deeply dependent on accounts of the empirical world. Successful normative reasoning must avoid the naturalization of constraints and seek to attribute correctly to agents what is and is not in their power to change. Recent discourse on global justice has often come to unjustified conclusions about agents obligations due to a narrow view of what is changeable and by whom.I would like to thank for their helpful comments Christian Barry, Rudiger Bittner, Darrel Moellendorf and Thomas Pogge.     

Who’s afraid of the big bad wolf? The interweaving of values and science

The role of values in the scientific process is widely debated. But evidence and values cannot be neatly separated. Instead, values infuse the entire scientific process, starting with the choice of research questions. Research avenues are selected based on prior beliefs about the workings of the world. In fact, informally assigned prior probabilities and normalizing constants play an essential role in distinguishing causes from correlations and ignoring irrelevant associations that would otherwise be suggested by raw data. But since these initial probabilities often have a heterogeneous pedigree – often not all that went into their formation is known or knowable – it becomes difficult to cleanly separate evidence from values. At the same time, this reality does not undermine science’s unique status in generating knowledge. This is because it is not the evidence per se generated by science, but rather the method by which science generates it, that justifies science’s privileged role.     

影响研究生自我实现的因素及实现途径探析

自我实现是学校教育的重要目标之一,也是研究生自身的人生追求。本文主要从研究生自身、环境因素、文化因素三个层面分析研究生自我实现的影响因素,并从充分活跃地体验生活、适应人格市场、学会选择等方面探讨促使研究生达到自我实现的途径。     

Love: gloriously amoral and arational

I argue that an evaluational conception of love collides with the way we value love. That way allows that love has causes, but not reasons, and it recognizes and celebrates a love that refuses to justify itself. Love has unjustified selectivity, due to its arbitrary causes. That imposes a non-tradability norm. A love for reasons, rational love or evaluational love would be propositional, and it therefore allows that the people we love are tradable commodities. A moralized conception of love is no less committed to treating those we love as tradable commodities; it is just that they are tradable moral commodities. An evaluative criterion of adequacy, I suggest, encourages the opposite view – a non-rational and non-evaluational concept of love. Such a love can set up partial obligations, which may even demand that one sacrifice one's life. Only a love that has causes but not reasons can have the kind of value that we think love has, and thus it would only be rational to pursue and foster such a love.     

‘What made me unhappy’. Experiences of,and responses to,lifestyle changes in breast cancer patients

Sixteen breast cancer patients were interviewed about any lifestyle changes they had experienced and their reactions to those changes. Data were collected and analysed via content analysis and then summary tabulations of patient responses until replication of responses was verified across patients. Results indicated that most patients suffered a reduction in recreation activities, unpleasant physical side effects from treatment and loss of feminine appearance characteristics, all of which were seen as decreases in previously available and valuable sources of social support and self-esteem. In response to these losses, patients reported a common coping strategy of avoidance or escape similar to some depressive symptomatology. Implications for counsellors are discussed.     

大学生对两个原因交互作用效应的评估

用大学生被试的两个实验考察人们对两个原因交互作用效应的定性评估和定量评估。实验结果表明,被试的定性评估与交互作用对比的性质相一致,而与因果力的性质不相一致;被试的定量评估随交互作用对比值增加而增加,而不受因果力的影响。实验结果一致支持交互作用对比标准,而不支持因果力标准和交叉乘积比率标准。这不同于以往的有关研究结果     

传媒介入医患纠纷的原因及作用探析

探讨传媒介入医患纠纷的原因及作用。经过分析发现,竞争的需要、经济的需要和受众的需要是传媒介入医患纠纷的主要动机和原因。总体而言,对传媒介入医患纠纷应持肯定态度。它在将医患矛盾进行公开化,唤起公众对医患纠纷问题的重视,提升公众参与意识,以及促进解决结果的公平性与公正性等方面发挥了积极作用。     

剖析患者投诉

患者投 是患者就医过程中与医务人员或医疗单位的利益发生的表现形式,着重剖析了因医疗费用、服务质量、医疗质量等引起的投诉,分析了投诉的目的及管理投诉单位的反应,并从几个方面探讨了如何对待投诉,减少投诉、避免投诉。     

对8─16岁少年儿童认同从众反应原因的研究

个体从众的原因究竟是什么？根据文献,假设有５种原因,以１００名８～１６岁少年儿童为被试进行测试,反应结果证实了这５种原因。然后,要求上述年龄的４００名被试对有关线段长度的和有关道德判断的从众反应情境、就５项原因作主次排序。结果表明：被试认为从众反应原因的主次顺序依次为“多数人更正确”、“表示归属群体”、“为了表示友好”、“为了免受责难”、“图省事不费心”;同时这种总趋势会因被试的年龄不同和从众情境不同表现出不同特点。