关于“电车困境中的伦理判断与专科护生疫苗情景之间无相关性”的特邀评论 - Suppr | 超能文献

Invited Commentary on "No Correlation Between Ethical Judgment in Trolley Dilemmas and Vaccine Scenarios for Nurse Specialist Students".

作者信息

Matisonn Heidi

机构信息

University of KwaZulu-Natal, Pietermaritzburg, KZN, South Africa.

出版信息

J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2020 Oct;15(4):298-299. doi: 10.1177/1556264620937177. Epub 2020 Jun 24.

DOI:10.1177/1556264620937177

Abstract

摘要

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述，助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型，支持多种主流文档格式。

相似文献

1

Invited Commentary on "No Correlation Between Ethical Judgment in Trolley Dilemmas and Vaccine Scenarios for Nurse Specialist Students".关于“电车困境中的伦理判断与专科护生疫苗情景之间无相关性”的特邀评论

J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2020 Oct;15(4):298-299. doi: 10.1177/1556264620937177. Epub 2020 Jun 24.

2

No Correlation Between Ethical Judgment in Trolley Dilemmas and Vaccine Scenarios for Nurse Specialist Students.护士专业学生在电车难题和疫苗情景中的伦理判断无相关性。

J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2020 Oct;15(4):292-297. doi: 10.1177/1556264620911234. Epub 2020 Mar 19.

3

Trolley Dilemmas Fail to Predict Ethical Judgment in a Hypothetical Vaccination Context.电车难题无法预测在假设的疫苗接种情境中的道德判断。

J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2019 Feb;14(1):23-32. doi: 10.1177/1556264618808175. Epub 2018 Nov 1.

4

Of Mice, Men, and Trolleys: Hypothetical Judgment Versus Real-Life Behavior in Trolley-Style Moral Dilemmas.《老鼠、男人和电车：在电车式道德困境中，假设判断与现实行为》。

Psychol Sci. 2018 Jul;29(7):1084-1093. doi: 10.1177/0956797617752640. Epub 2018 May 9.

5

Do we need empirical research on the use of trolley dilemmas in applied ethics? Reply to commentary by Heidi Matisonn.我们是否需要针对应用伦理学中电车难题的使用进行实证研究？对海蒂·马蒂松评论的回应

J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2020 Oct;15(4):300-301. doi: 10.1177/1556264620939805. Epub 2020 Jul 8.

6

Intuitive Probabilities and the Limitation of Moral Imagination.直观概率与道德想象力的局限

Cogn Sci. 2018 May;42 Suppl 1:38-68. doi: 10.1111/cogs.12598. Epub 2018 Feb 16.

7

The Foreign Language Effect on Moral Judgment: The Role of Emotions and Norms.外语对道德判断的影响：情感与规范的作用。

PLoS One. 2015 Jul 15;10(7):e0131529. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0131529. eCollection 2015.

8

Sidetracked by trolleys: Why sacrificial moral dilemmas tell us little (or nothing) about utilitarian judgment.被手推车带偏：为什么牺牲性道德困境对功利主义判断的揭示甚少（或毫无揭示）。

Soc Neurosci. 2015;10(5):551-60. doi: 10.1080/17470919.2015.1023400. Epub 2015 Mar 20.

9

Overlooked Evidence and a Misunderstanding of What Trolley Dilemmas Do Best: Commentary on Bostyn, Sevenhant, and Roets (2018).被忽视的证据以及对电车难题最佳用途的误解：对博斯汀、塞文汉特和罗茨（2018年）的评论

Psychol Sci. 2019 Sep;30(9):1389-1391. doi: 10.1177/0956797619827914. Epub 2019 Jul 30.

10

Moral dilemmas in cognitive neuroscience of moral decision-making: a principled review.道德决策的认知神经科学中的道德困境：原则性综述。

Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2012 Apr;36(4):1249-64. doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2012.02.008. Epub 2012 Feb 14.

引用本文的文献

1

Do we need empirical research on the use of trolley dilemmas in applied ethics? Reply to commentary by Heidi Matisonn.我们是否需要针对应用伦理学中电车难题的使用进行实证研究？对海蒂·马蒂松评论的回应

J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2020 Oct;15(4):300-301. doi: 10.1177/1556264620939805. Epub 2020 Jul 8.