What do forensic analysts consider relevant to their decision making?

In response to research demonstrating that irrelevant contextual information can bias forensic science analyses, authorities have increasingly urged laboratories to limit analysts' access to irrelevant and potentially biasing information (Dror and Cole (2010) [3]; National Academy of Sciences (2009) [18]; President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (2016) [22]; UK Forensic Science Regulator (2015) [26]). However, a great challenge in implementing this reform is determining which information is task-relevant and which is task-irrelevant. In the current study, we surveyed 183 forensic analysts to examine what they consider relevant versus irrelevant in their forensic analyses. Results revealed that analysts generally do not regard information regarding the suspect or victim as essential to their analytic tasks. However, there was significant variability among analysts within and between disciplines. Findings suggest that forensic science disciplines need to agree on what they regard as task-relevant before context management procedures can be properly implemented. The lack of consensus about what is relevant information not only leaves room for biasing information, but also reveals foundational gaps in what analysts consider crucial in forensic decision making.     

论犯罪心理测试前的访谈

测试前访谈技术是心理测试技术的重要组成部分。犯罪心理测试前访谈是为了让受测者从心理上对即将开始的测试做好准备。如果不进行访谈,或者访谈进行得不好,就很难达到测试的目的。     

社会心理学与精神分析学及其后现代转向

社会心理学的孕育、产生和发展过程,得益于许多学科或知识领域的推动。尤其值得注意的是,它首先与现代精神分析学及作为其重要知识来源之一的精神病学之间存在着深刻的不解之缘。精神分析学在自身发展过程中的每一次重大进展都会对社会心理学的理论和方法产生不同的影响。精神分析学在20世纪下半叶发生的后现代转向,也或早或晚地涉入到社会心理学有关领域的发展中。其中一个重要结果就是后现代社会心理学的出现。后现代精神分析学既从心理学理论层面又从哲学认识论和方法论层面提供了孕育后现代社会心理学的动因。     

商标财产化的负面效应及其化解

商标本为一种用于区别来源的工具。然而,现代商标法将之财产化,并采用民法财产权体系中的绝对权保护模式。绝对权的认知结构预设着强有力的私权保护,这为商标权的强化和扩张埋下了种子。商标财产化的理论基础脆弱,经典的自然权利理论、现代的法经济学理论以及商誉论和广告功能保护论都无法为商标财产权提供坚实的理论支撑。商标财产化在实践中产生了一些负面效应,在我国还呈加剧之势,有必要予以纠正。在认知上,需要打破绝对权理念之拘束。在实践中,停止侵害的禁令救济的绝对化适用需加以纠正;混淆之扩张需谨慎对待,以反击"财产论"对"混淆论"的挤压。此外,还需提升商标性使用的地位,使其扮演商标法"守门人"角色,以期对商标财产权的不断扩张进行约束和限制。     

Enacting Oblivion

After periods of major political change, incoming regimes have often declared “acts of oblivion” in which courts and sometimes citizens are commanded to forget what happened under the preceding regime. But how are courts and citizens supposed to obey this command? Must they not remember what it is they are commanded to forget? If so, obedience is only possible at the price of disobedience. This paper suggests this paradox raises important issues about the concept of memory. It argues that in order to understand acts of oblivion we need to distinguish between two aspects of memory: the cognitive, concerned with the transmission of information, and the conative, concerned with the transmission of will and affect. This distinction provides a way of avoiding the more overtly paradoxical features of acts of oblivion. However, there remain significant difficulties facing the political project of forgetting.     

Relativism

Modern democracies increasingly confuse civic or political equality with a radical relativism that calls into question legitimate principles of hierarchy and the very idea of reasonable value judgments. This confusion reflects a “corruption,” in Montesquieu’s sense, of democracy rooted in a refusal to recognize distinctions that are integral to both human nature and social life. A moderate form of cultural relativism is a genuine intellectual achievement that helps combat ethnocentrism and allows one to better appreciate the full range of human experience. But criteria of meaning and truth are by no means entirely dependent upon cultural context. Our contemporary awareness of the “relativity” of cultures and historical experiences must be complemented by a robust appreciation of the universality of Reason and citizenship.

Mixing Habermas with Bayes: Methodological and Theoretical Advances in the Study of Deliberation

Two challenges stand out in the study of deliberation: the development of appropriate methodological tools and the development of more unified analytical frameworks. On the one hand, analysing deliberative processes is demanding and time‐consuming; hence we tend to have only few and non‐randomly selected cases at the group or context level. In addition, the real world of deliberation presents us with a complex matrix of nested, cross‐classified, and repeated speakers. This article shows that Bayesian multi‐level modelling provides an elegant way to tackle these methodological problems. On the other hand, we attempt to enrich comparative institutionalism with individual characteristics and psychologically relevant variables (such as group composition). Focusing on Swiss and German parliamentary debates we show that institutional factors ‐ in particular, consensus systems ‐, the gender composition of committees and plenary sessions, and age matter for the quality of deliberation. Furthermore, we also show that partisan affiliation ‐ government or opposition status of MPs ‐ affects deliberative quality and can refine institutional arguments. We conclude that a multi‐level approach to deliberation focusing on contextual and actor‐related characteristics and using Bayesian hierarchical modelling paves the way toward a more advanced understanding ‐ and methodological handling ‐ of deliberative processes.     

布卢姆认知领域教育目标分类理论评析

生物学上动植物分类学的理论为布卢姆构造其认知领域教育目标分类理论提供了借鉴。根据人的认知目标是从识记相对简单的知识到非常抽象的思维这样一个渐进过程,布卢姆把教育的认知目标分为六大主类（识记、领会、应用、分析、综合及评价）以及其它亚类。这种理论被证明“对研究和教学两方面都是相当有用的”。但由于布卢姆认知目标分类理论不是认识过程的先后层次,不是行为发展的过程,没有揭示出能力形成的内在机制,也缺乏学习理论的指导,导致了教育实践中的诸多困惑。我们应对布卢姆理论进行深刻的反思,立足本国实际,构建本土的教育目标分类理论。