MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2993866941

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

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

Bibliographic record

VenueNew Zealand journal of psychology · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild Abuse and Trauma
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTortureHypocrisyEconomic JusticeTheme (computing)CriminologyHuman rightsSociologyReputationPolitical scienceLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from 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. …

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.009
Science and technology studies0.0020.007
Scholarly communication0.0060.008
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0040.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.109
GPT teacher head0.445
Teacher spread0.337 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNew Zealand journal of psychologySame topicChild Abuse and TraumaFrench-language works237,207