How Many Casualties Are Too Many? Proportional Reasoning in the Valuation of Military and Civilian Lives1
How Many Casualties Are Too Many? Proportional Reasoning in the Valuation of Military and Civilian Lives1
复制标题
多少伤亡算太多？
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2009
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Tiffany L. Dood
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
James Friedrich;Tiffany L. Dood
当被认为是更大的“风险”群体的一小部分时，人们往往认为拯救的生命不那么有价值，死亡更容易被接受。两项针对美国大学生的研究表明，在判断美军和中东平民伤亡的可接受数字时，这种影响是存在的。在当前的美伊冲突开始时（研究1），启动成本效益推理对伊拉克平民的价值比美国军人的价值产生更大的比例贬值。在对伊朗进行武装干预以阻止武器发展的假设中（研究2），女性而非男性对美国军队的比例贬值比对伊朗平民的比例贬值更大。在这两项研究中，比例推理者都愿意接受更多的伤亡。对公众的看法和态度的影响进行了讨论。
People frequently judge saved lives as less valuable and deaths more acceptable when they are characterized as small fractions of larger “at-risk” groups. Two studies with U.S. college students demonstrated this effect in judgments concerning acceptable numbers of U.S. military and Middle Eastern civilian casualties. At the beginning of the current U.S.–Iraq conflict (Study 1), priming cost–benefit reasoning produced greater proportional devaluation for Iraqi civilian than for U.S. military lives. In a hypothetical armed intervention in Iran to halt weapons development (Study 2), women but not men showed greater proportional devaluation for U.S. military than for Iranian civilian lives. In both studies, proportional reasoners were willing to accept more casualties. Implications for public perceptions and attitudes are discussed.
新群体成员的群体内和群体外刻板印象的发展：感知群体变异性和种族中心主义的变化。
影响因子：
7.6
作者：
Ryan,CS;Bogart,LM
通讯作者：
Bogart,LM
影响因子：
5.4
作者：
JUDD, CM;PARK, B
通讯作者：
PARK, B