Literature DB >> 11014051

How serious are expressions of protected values?

J Baron1, S Leshner.   

Abstract

People think that some things that they value should be protected from trade-offs with other things. For example, people think that no economic gain is great enough to justify clear-cutting old-growth forest. The authors probed the stability of these protected values (PVs) in several ways. Subjects were asked to think of counterexamples, and this had some effect on PVs. Subjects were then asked how they would resolve conflicts between 2 PVs. Resolutions did not differ from those between other values, but subjects tended to feel that conflicts between PVs did not occur in reality. Despite people's claims that PVs are unchanged by variation in quantity, expression of PVs was reduced when the magnitude or probability of the violation of a PV was smaller. In summary, PVs appear to be labile and amenable to challenge. Despite earlier concerns, apparent PVs may not always preclude the use of valuation measures in cost-effectiveness analysis or negotiated agreement on controversial issues.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11014051     DOI: 10.1037//1076-898x.6.3.183

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Psychol Appl        ISSN: 1076-898X


  9 in total

1.  Sacred bounds on rational resolution of violent political conflict.

Authors:  Jeremy Ginges; Scott Atran; Douglas Medin; Khalil Shikaki
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2007-04-25       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  Evaluating taboo trade-offs in ecosystems services and human well-being.

Authors:  Tim M Daw; Sarah Coulthard; William W L Cheung; Katrina Brown; Caroline Abunge; Diego Galafassi; Garry D Peterson; Tim R McClanahan; Johnstone O Omukoto; Lydiah Munyi
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2015-05-18       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  Nudges for Judges: An Experiment on the Effect of Making Sentencing Costs Explicit.

Authors:  Eyal Aharoni; Heather M Kleider-Offutt; Sarah F Brosnan; Morris B Hoffman
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2022-05-20

4.  Judging near and distant virtue and vice.

Authors:  Tal Eyal; Nira Liberman; Yaacov Trope
Journal:  J Exp Soc Psychol       Date:  2008-07-01

5.  Attitudes to in vitro meat: A survey of potential consumers in the United States.

Authors:  Matti Wilks; Clive J C Phillips
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-02-16       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  The Association Between the Special Subsidy for Families Practicing Family Planning and the Mental Health of Loss/Disability-of-Single-Child Parents: Evidence from China.

Authors:  Enjian Wang; Hongwei Hu; Yang Xu; Hongting Liu; Bai Yang; Ruihui Chang; Wei Jiang
Journal:  Adm Policy Ment Health       Date:  2021-03

7.  Slippery scales: Cost prompts, but not benefit prompts, modulate sentencing recommendations in laypeople.

Authors:  Eyal Aharoni; Heather M Kleider-Offutt; Sarah F Brosnan; Sharlene Fernandes
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-07-31       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Ventromedial and dorsolateral prefrontal interactions underlie will to fight and die for a cause.

Authors:  Clara Pretus; Nafees Hamid; Hammad Sheikh; Ángel Gómez; Jeremy Ginges; Adolf Tobeña; Richard Davis; Oscar Vilarroya; Scott Atran
Journal:  Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci       Date:  2019-08-07       Impact factor: 3.436

9.  Social comfort zones for transformative conservation decisions in a changing climate.

Authors:  Shannon Hagerman; Terre Satterfield; Sara Nawaz; Guillaume Peterson St-Laurent; Robert Kozak; Robin Gregory
Journal:  Conserv Biol       Date:  2021-09-29       Impact factor: 7.563

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.