The goal of decision-making is to select one option and disregard the others. However, deliberation can also create a memory association between the chosen and unchosen options. This study aims to investigate how choice and deliberation affect the memory of postdecision options and the underlying mechanisms. Using event-related potentials (ERPs), we examined item recognition (Experiment 1) and associative recognition (Experiment 2) following certain and uncertain decisions. In Experiment 1, items that were chosen in certain decisions were remembered better than unchosen items. There was no difference between chosen and unchosen items in uncertain decisions. Moreover, a late recollection-related LPC (a late positive component) old/new effect was larger for chosen items than unchosen items in certain decisions. The early familiarity-related FN400 and the late recollection-related LPC old/new effects were significant for chosen and unchosen items in uncertain decisions. In Experiment 2, there was no difference in performance on associative memory. A FN400 old/new effect (an index of integration) in certain or uncertain decisions was not observed. Although significant LPC old/new effects were found in both certain and uncertain decisions, no difference was found between them. These results propose that decision-making can enhance item memory performance through two distinct processes: value and elaboration. Elaboration involves focusing on the details within items rather than integrating items into a cohesive whole.

BACKGROUND: Public participation can be both supported and limited by decision-makers. Therefore, citizens either participate in top-down approved formats or have to turn towards subversion. These different participation practices, called invited and uninvited, are often treated by researchers as mutually exclusive. In this article, we present the case of patient organisations\' involvement in various state-controlled deliberation bodies in Russia, which does not fit into a smooth binary distinction of the patient participation practice. Instead, identified patient participation practices combine interaction approved by gatekeepers with interaction, which are subversive and grassroots-initiated. Conceptually, it means that invited and uninvited participation can be better understood as intertwined ecologies.
METHODS: The article is based on a qualitative ethnographic study, which includes participatory observations of the meetings of state-controlled public participation bodies, such as public councils, 51 semi-structured interviews with members of these bodies and an analysis of the relevant policy and methodological documents. Informed consent to record and transcribe all interviews was obtained. Thematic analysis has been used to produce the results.
RESULTS: Russian patient organisations often work informally and independently of state-approved practices expected from them. Some subversive practices happen outside official meetings, others become widely used best practices and others remain everyday mundane interactions, which contribute to the maintenance of the independence of patient organisations against otherwise dominating and nondemocratic state actors.
CONCLUSIONS: The ecologising approach to patient participation, which interprets invited and uninvited practices as interconnected, has better explanatory power for cases in which citizens maintain independence despite all limitations associated with authoritarian settings. Conceptualising invited and uninvited practices as situations, or separate time- and space-bound events, is a helpful theoretical framework for understanding diverse and seemingly contradictory public participation practices.
UNASSIGNED: Research participants communicated amendments to the initial research framework to incorporate their needs. Repeated interviews allowed triangulation of preliminary findings with research participants. The article is co-authored with the patient organisation representative, who has contributed directly to data analysis and presentation.

The deliberate-morality account implies that moral punishment should be decreased with time pressure and increased with deliberation while the intuitive-morality account predicts the opposite. In three experiments, moral punishment was examined in a simultaneous one-shot Prisoner\'s Dilemma game with a costly punishment option. The players cooperated or defected and then decided whether or not to punish their partners. In Experiment 1, the punishment decisions were made without or with time pressure. In Experiment 2, the punishment decisions were immediate or delayed by pauses in which participants deliberated their decisions. In Experiment 3, participants were asked to deliberate self-interest or fairness before deciding whether to punish their partners. Different types of punishment were distinguished using the cooperation-and-punishment model. In Experiment 1, time pressure decreased moral punishment. In Experiment 2, deliberation increased moral punishment. So far, the evidence supports the deliberate-morality account. Experiment 3 demonstrates that the effect of deliberation depends on what is deliberated. When participants deliberated self-interest rather than fairness, moral punishment was decreased. The results suggest that unguided deliberation increases moral punishment, but the effects of deliberation are modulated by the type of deliberation that takes place. These results strengthen a process-based account of punishment which offers a more nuanced understanding of the context-specific effect of deliberation on moral punishment than the deliberate-morality account.

BACKGROUND: The proposed concept of secure/insecure lifeattachment reflects the experience of the world and life as a good (or insecure/threatening) place to be. The present article describes the theoretical foundation, development, and validation of a revised measure that captures the phenomenon of secure/insecure life attachment. The revised scale consists of seven dimensions: (1) Coexistence, (2) Reliability, (3) Safetiness, (4) Integration, (5) Inclusion, (6) Participation, and (7) Deliberation.
METHODS: In three studies (N = 1,059), we examined the factor structure and the convergent and predictive validity of the Life Attachment Scale-Revised (LAS-R).
RESULTS: Our results support a seven-factor structure of the scale, reflecting the aforementioned dimensions. Furthermore, convergent and predictive validity were established through correlations with related concepts of life satisfaction, flourishing, openness to the future, and perceived stress.
CONCLUSIONS: We have devised and substantiated a scale adept at gauging dimensions of secure and insecure/disordered life attachment. Empirical evidence from statistical analyses supports the assumption that the LAS-R is psychometrically sound, establishing its reliability and validity as a dependable instrument. Thus, the scale has promising implications for developing the empirical base for research in many areas of psychology, sociology, and the social sciences.

The relative contribution of intuitive and reflective cognitive systems in cooperative decision making is a topic of hot debate. Research with adults suggests that intuition often favors cooperation, but these effects are contextually sensitive. Emerging evidence has shown that in many contexts children show a tendency toward intuitive cooperation, but research investigating these processes in children is sparse and has produced mixed findings. In the current study we investigated the influence of intuitive and reflective decision processes on children\'s fairness behavior by manipulating decision time. We tested (N = 158) pairs of children between 4 and 10 years of age from a rural community in Canada. Children\'s decisions to accept or reject allocations of candies were either made under time pressure or after a 10-s delay. We assessed the impact of decision time on children\'s aversion to inequitable distributions of resources by comparing their responses to equal allocations with either disadvantageous allocations or advantageous allocations. We found that children showed a greater age-related increase in advantageous inequity aversion when decisions were made under time pressure compared to when they were made after a delay. In contrast, we did not observe a significant impact of decision time on the development of disadvantageous inequity aversion. These findings suggest that intuitive decision processes may contribute to the development of fairness concerns in middle childhood.

This article draws on the deliberative play framework to examine empirical examples of storytelling in an online deliberative forum: The Oregon Citizen Assembly (ORCA) Pilot on COVID-19 Recovery. ORCA engaged 36 citizens in deliberation about state policy through an online deliberative process spanning seven weeks. Drawing on literature on small stories in deliberation, we trace stories related to a policy proposal about paying parents to educate children at home. Our analysis demonstrates that storytelling activities accomplish aspects of deliberative play through introducing uncertainty, resisting premature closure, and promoting an \"as if\" frame that allows groups to explore the scope and implications of proposals. Forum design influences interaction and our analysis suggests that technology use and timing are key design features that can facilitate or inhibit deliberative play.

暂无摘要。

In this study, we investigate what leads people to fact-check online information, how they fact-check such information in practice, how fact-checking affects their judgments about the information\'s credibility, and how each of the above processes is affected by the salience of the information to readers\' cultural identities. Eight pairs of adult participants were recruited from diverse cultural backgrounds to participate online in joint fact-checking of suspect Tweets. To examine their collaborative deliberations we developed a novel experimental design and analytical model. Our analyses indicate that the salience of online information to people\'s cultural identities influences their decision to fact-check it, that fact-checking deliberations are often non-linear and iterative, that collaborative fact-checking leads people to revise their initial judgments about the credibility of online information, and that when online information is highly salient to people\'s cultural identities, they apply different standards of credibility when fact-checking it. In conclusion, we propose that cultural identity is an important factor in the fact-checking of online information, and that joint fact-checking of online information by people from diverse cultural backgrounds may have significant potential as an educational tool to reduce people\'s susceptibility to misinformation.

This article considers the normative and critical value of popular comedy. I begin by assembling and evaluating a range of political theory literature on comedy. I argue that popular comedy can be conducive to both critical and transformative democratic effects, but that these effects are contingent on the way comedic performances are received by audiences. I illustrate this by means of a case study of a comedic climate change \'debate\' from the television show, Last Week Tonight. Drawing from recent scholarship on deliberation, judgment and rhetoric, I highlight both critical and transformative dimensions of the performance. I attribute these to the vignette\'s likely reception, which I describe as \'dissonant\' - unresolved, affectively turbulent and aesthetically attuned. I argue that comedy is uniquely positioned to spur such \'dissonant\' modes of engagement and, in so doing, to promote acknowledgement and reflective judgment.

Fast-and-slow models of decision-making are commonly invoked to explain economic behaviour. However, past research has focused on human cooperation and generosity and thus largely overlooked situations where there are sharp conflicts between efficiency and equality, or between efficiency and more intuitive moral values (repugnance). Here, we contribute to fill this gap in the literature. We conducted a preregistered experiment (n = 1500 recruited from Prolific) to assess the effects of fast, intuitive decisions, under time pressure versus slow, deliberate decisions, under time delay, on (i) people\'s distributional preferences and (ii) their attitudes toward repugnant transactions. The results show increased preference for equality and decreased preference for efficiency under time pressure, but no effects on moral repugnance. Exploratory analyses revealed that most of the observed treatment effects in our data were accounted for by women. Our results provide some support for theories that associate controlled cognition with concern for efficiency, and intuitive, emotional responses with inequality aversion.