Coalition incentives and party bias in Chile

This article revisits the debate over Chile's binomial electoral rules and its consequences and examines how the new electoral system conceived by a democratic congress altered political competition. It utilizes a seat-vote model of multiparty competition to analyze party bias under the binomial rule. This approach differs substantively from prior studies of the Chilean case that focused primarily on the disproportionality of aggregate results. In contrast to earlier analyses, the findings reveal that the allocation of the seats under the binominal resulted in significant party bias benefiting the main parties of the right. This bias, however, was eliminated after the electoral reform. The new rule continues to provide majoritarian benefits to parties receiving larger shares of votes, but this effect is less pronounced than before. It is now easier for small parties to gain seats, which has increased party fragmentation. However, we show that coalition incentives, which were heralded as one of the main advantages of the binomial rule, are also significant under the new rule in use since 2017.     

The Impact of Prejudice Screening Procedures on Racial Bias in the Courtroom

The current study examines the impact of the challenge for cause procedure and its effectiveness in curbing racial prejudice in trials involving Black defendants. Participants were provided with a trial summary of a defendant charged with either drug trafficking or embezzlement. The race of the defendant was either White or Black, with participants in the Black defendant condition receiving (prior to the trial presentation) either no challenge, a close-ended standard challenge, or a modified reflective pretrial questioning strategy. Overall, the results revealed an anti-Black bias in judgments. While the closed ended challenge did little to reduce this bias, the reflective format demonstrated a reduction in racial bias. Theoretical and applied implications of these findings are discussed.

紧急状态下的守法难题——以决策心理为视角

法治社会具有日常状态与紧急状态两幅面孔。当社会进入紧急状态，公民的行为策略会改变，遵守法律将变得困难。这是由人类的思维机制与认知倾向决定的。人类拥有快速但不准确的“系统一”与缓慢但可靠的“系统二”两套决策机制，在面对紧急状态时大量的情绪刺激会让“系统一”控制决策支配权，而信息过载也会限制“系统二”的监督与预警作用。因此，紧急状态下的个体决策者总是运用“系统一”进行行为选择。“系统一”采用启发式判断，有限时间内的决策往往存在各种认知偏差，导致人的行为与守法的要求背道而驰。正视这些违法行为背后的心理过程，通过事前建立完善应急措施与事中规范宣传报道，按照认知规律办事能够较好地减少违法行为。     

Women seafarers in Taiwan: survivors during the evolution of the special shipping relationship between China and Taiwan

The first Taiwan women seafarer appeared on a container ship as a training deck officer in 1998, but so far only a handful of Taiwan shipping companies are willing to provide female navigational students with on-board internship opportunities. Therefore, this study attempts to explore the career development of women seafarers in Taiwan. The author has adopted the qualitative research approach, conducted in-depth interviews with women seafarers and representatives of shipping companies, and sailed on an LPG carrier for 14 days to conduct on-site observations. This study discovers that, in the seesaw battle between occupational gender-equality awareness and the shipping market mechanism, the dominant power remains in the hands of employers who demonstrate gender bias towards women seafarers. A noteworthy finding in this study is that the political forces, which include the evolution of the special shipping relationship across the Taiwan Strait as well as the domestic regulations limiting the employment of foreign seafarers, have had a non-negligible positive impact on the seafaring career prospects of Taiwanese women.     

Factor analysis applied to magnitude estimates of punishment Seriousness: Patterns of individual differences

This research makes use of factor analysis to locate important dimensions of individual differences in perceptions of legal punishments. A sample of 152 recently arrested persons provided magnitude estimates of the seriousness of several types and levels of punishment. A factor analysis of the data showed that the major dimensions of individual differentiation were in responses to (a) lengthy periods of imprisonment; (b) several punishments judged less serious, including short periods in jail or on probation; and (c) fines. Regressions of the factor scores on individual characteristics are reported, and the implications of the analysis for deterrence theory are discussed.     

The Preference for Indirect Harm

We presented subjects pairs of hypothetical scenarios. The action in each scenario harmed some people in order to aid others. In one member of the pair, the harm was a direct result of the action. In the other member, it was an indirect byproduct. Subjects preferred the indirect harm to the direct harm. This result could not be fully explained in terms of differences in judgments about which option was more active, more intentional, more likely to cause harm, or more subject to the disapproval of others. Taken together, these findings provide evidence for a new bias in judgment, a tendency to favor indirectly harmful options over directly harmful alternatives, irrespective of the associated outcomes, intentions, or self-presentational concerns. We speculate that this bias could originate from the use of a typical but somewhat unreliable property of harmful acts, their directness, as a cue to moral evaluation. We discuss the implications of the bias for a range of social issues, including the distinction between passive and active euthanasia, legal deterrence, and the rhetoric of affirmative action.     

Knowledge is Power: A Theory-Based Approach to Reducing School Violence

The study assesses the impact of a theory-based school violence program though a survey of 1,500 middle and high school students. It is the first to apply the concept of optimistic bias within the school violence context. Despite high profile school shootings, the students maintained the belief that violence was less likely to happen to them (personally) or in their schools than elsewhere in the country. Findings indicate that optimistic bias can be reduced through educational campaigns, and suggest a means of reducing violence by first reducing optimistic bias.     

The belief in an unjust world: An egotistic delusion

The main hypothesis of Lerner's just world theory says that people are inclined to think that their physical and social environment is just and that individuals generally get what they deserve and deserve what they get. Contrary to Lerner's assumption, however, it is suggested in the article that in some situations, people may perceive the world as unjust because such a belief has a specific ego-defensive compoment for an individual. It is likely, for instance, that the belief in an unjust world, though in itself a legitimate block to success, may be aggrvated in conditions diagnostic for competence and hence can be used as a special form of self-handicapping strategy. This assumption has been tested in a 2 (low vs. high tendency to engate in self-handicapping behaviors) x by 2 (low vs. high opportunity to use the belief in an unjust world as a self-handicapping strategy) experiment. The results of the study fully supported the author's predictions.     

Quality of Laypersons' Assessment of Forensically Relevant Stimuli,

The current study examined the potential for cognitive bias in lay examiners' comparisons of footwear impressions within the technical review process while addressing limitations of previous research. Prior research has found inconsistent results regarding the extent to which cognitive bias may influence forensic comparisons, often asking non-experts to review forensic stimuli above their competency level. Furthermore, past research has largely ignored the potential for cognitive bias during the technical review process. In collaboration with the Miami-Dade Police Department's Forensic Services Bureau, we examined the effects of previous examiners' level of experience and prior knowledge of the previous examiner's decision on the technical review stage of footwear impression stimuli. Before lay examiners were presented with pairs of known match and nonmatch footwear impressions, they were either told that an expert or a novice had previously examined them and determined them to be either a match, nonmatch, or inconclusive (plus a no-information condition). Participants then evaluated each pair of footwear impressions to make their own determinations of match, nonmatch, or inconclusive. Results support the technical review process for all decision types, as known nonmatch stimuli were generally more difficult for lay examiners to assess than known match stimuli. Knowledge of a prior examiner's decision and status was observed only when the prior decision was inconclusive, suggesting the need for inclusion of inconclusive decisions in future research examining cognitive bias in forensic examination.