MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2993866941

Need or desire? A review of Justice as a basic human need

2009· review· en· W2993866941 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ian M. Evans, Tomoko Yamaguchi

Notice bibliographique

RevueNew Zealand journal of psychology · 2009
Typereview
Langueen
DomainePsychology
ThématiqueChild Abuse and Trauma
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésTortureHypocrisyEconomic JusticeTheme (computing)CriminologyHuman rightsSociologyReputationPolitical scienceLaw
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Thanks to the frequent use of the term in the Performance Based Research Funding initiative, world-class is now one of the favourite adjectives of New Zealand's vice-chancellors. But here is a book that is genuinely world-class, written largely by local authors and edited by the indefatigable A.J.W. (Tony) Taylor. He, of course, is Emeritus Professor of Psychology at Victoria University of Wellington and he has included many of his colleagues there as contributors. This is fitting, since Vic has built an excellent academic reputation around the theme of justice, not just in forensic psychology, but in criminology, public policy, and the law. Their Crime and Justice Research Centre has deservedly achieved an international reputation. The present work, therefore, has an impeccable scholarly pedigree and is broad in its coverage: philosophy, religion, developmental and social psychology, therapeutic processes, and human rights have all been found a place. There is something especially timely about a major work on justice coming out now, with the Western world--largely the United States-facing accusations of double standards and hypocrisy, with the indelible stain of Guantanamo Bay, Abu Ghraib, and the slow response (September, 2008) of the American Psychological Association to deter its members from participating in interrogations at detention centres. Thus it was particularly prescient to include a chapter specifically devoted to issues of torture, especially as the key focus relates to treatment of torture victims. As a psychotherapist based in London, Paul Burns is able to offer valuable insights into the work of specific organisations offering support to political refugees. While we accept that empirical work in this area would be challenging, the absence of any sort of data or evaluation research is the only regrettable element. New Zealand, while playing rather far from the world's Centre Court, has its own controversies and inconsistencies: the pioneering work on restorative justice on the one hand and the perpetration of blatantly unfair legislation such as the Foreshore and Seabed Act (2004) on the other. Perhaps justice is commonly the loser when people perceive their fundamental interests are being threatened. And so we come to one of the central questions of this book: Is justice a basic human need? Taylor's introductory chapter provides an authoritative, historical background to the topic of justice, although had he cited the work of Miller (2001) on the consequences of injustice he could have strengthened his case. Among the many interesting phenomena Miller describes are studies showing that if plaintiffs win their case without a lengthy court hearing in which they could argue their cause, they remain dissatisfied--we seem to need our day in court. It is in the second chapter by Charles Tolman (University of Victoria, Canada) where the argument is presented that justice is a fundamental condition for survival as human beings. From the perspective of moral philosophy we consciously make decisions about what is right and wrong in relationship with others and the social rules we live by. Morality, Tolman argues, is the heart of humanity, and justice makes it possible. With one of us (TY) not being brought up within Christian traditions, we found the chapter by Marshall (a theologian at VUW) an interesting overview of the Bible's teachings on the meanings of justice, albeit quite contradictory in places. However this chapter has a proselytising fervour to it that sits uncomfortably with psychology. Consider the last two lines: know this God is to learn about the meaning of justice. To love this God is to join in God's great campaign to restore justice to the world (p. 37). Evolutionary psychology has a completely different take on the matter. Empathy (caring for each other), fair distribution of resources, respect for earned rights, and the exercise of power only to uphold agreed upon rules all had fundamental survival value within small social groups--families sharing a cave, clans travelling together, or tribes demarcating territory. …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,004
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Revue systématique · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: Synthèse
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,008
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,046

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0040,008
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0020,001
Bibliométrie0,0070,009
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0020,007
Communication savante0,0060,008
Science ouverte0,0010,003
Intégrité de la recherche0,0040,007
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0040,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,109
Tête enseignante GPT0,445
Écart entre enseignants0,337 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeRevue systématique
Domainenon disponible
GenreSynthèse

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2009
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueNew Zealand journal of psychologyMême sujetChild Abuse and TraumaTravaux en français237 207