《易数钩隐图》作者等问题辨

自南宋时起,《易数钩隐图》一书的作者就有二字与二籍贯的争议。本文就有关问题进行了考辨。得出北宋有二刘牧、前刘牧著《易数钩隐图》、黄黎献为之续补等结论。最后指出,彭城刘牧的道学思想应当在宋明理学中占有一席之地。     

Racism en Route

This article argues that in Africa, the nature and advent of racism has to be traced back to the earliest encounters between Africans and Europeans, including the first seven centuries but especially during the slavery and colonial eras. Religion (notably Islam and Christianity), trade, education, culture, and “science” were important incubators and justifiers of racism, in earlier as well as recent times. The paper concludes by proposing some ways in which African theology can stay agile and keep pace with the resilient and adaptive forms of racism in contemporary Africa.     

The impact of informant gender on children’s endorsement of scientific and non-scientific information

By roughly 6 years of age, children acquire the stereotype that men are more competent than women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM), potentially leading to greater trust in scientific information provided by men. This study tested whether 3- to 8-year-old children differentially endorsed conflicting information about science and toys presented by male and female informants depicted as a ‘man’ and ‘woman’ (Exp1) or ‘scientists’ (Exp2). Children were expected to endorse toy testimony from gender-matched informants; thus, the key question concerned endorsement of science testimony. In Exp1 (N = 149), boys and girls showed a same-gender informant preference for toy testimony; however, girls endorsed the male informant's testimony more for science than for toys – but only when tested by a male experimenter. In Exp2 (N = 264), boys and girls showed a same-gender preference, irrespective of content. Findings suggest that STEM-related gender stereotypes might lead girls to trust scientific information presented by men over women in certain contexts.     

Rivals without a cause? Relative performance feedback creates destructive competition despite aligned incentives

Whether people compete or cooperate with each other has consequences for their own performance and that of organizations. To explain why people compete or cooperate, previous research has focused on two main factors: situational outcome structures and personality types. Here, we propose that—above and beyond these two factors—situational cues, such as the format in which people receive feedback, strongly affect whether they act competitively, cooperatively, or individualistically. Results of a laboratory experiment support our theorizing: After receiving ranking feedback, both students and experienced managers treated group situations with cooperative outcome structures as competitive and were in consequence willing to forgo guaranteed financial gains to pursue a—financially irrelevant—better rank. Conversely, in dilemma situations, feedback based on the joint group outcome led to more cooperation than ranking feedback. Our study contributes to research on competition, cooperation, interdependence theory, forced ranking, and the design of information environments.     

简帛《周易·夬卦》"丧"字补说

上博三《周易·夬卦》中的“丧”并非误字,马王堆汉墓帛书本与此相应的“牵”实为“桑”字,当读为“丧”,而今本中的“牵”可能系“桑”之形讹。