Biomedical subjects

Bertram F Malle

Publications and source records attributed to Bertram F Malle.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2006

The actor-observer asymmetry in attribution: a (surprising) meta-analysis.

The actor-observer hypothesis (E. E. Jones & R. E. Nisbett, 1971) states that people tend to explain their own behavior with situation causes and other people's behavior with person causes. Widely known in psychology, this asymmetry has been described as robust, firmly established, and pervasive. However, a meta-analysis on 173 published studies revealed average effect sizes from d = -0.016 to d = 0.095. A moderator analysis showed that the asymmetry held only when the actor was portrayed as highly idiosyncratic, when hypothetical events were explained, when actor and observer were intimates, or when free-response explanations were coded. In addition, the asymmetry held for negative events, but a reverse asymmetry held for positive events. This valence effect may indicate a self-serving pattern in attribution, but across valence, no actor-observer asymmetry exists.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2003

Judging mens rea: the tension between folk concepts and legal concepts of intentionality.

Concepts such as intention, motive, or forethought have generated a great deal of doubt, dispute, and confusion in legal decision making. Here we argue for an empirically based strategy of defining and using such mens rea concepts. Instead of the standard approach of settling these concepts by theoretical argument and the debaters' own intuitions, we rely on social psychological research to determine the meaning and significance of folk concepts concerning mens rea. We demonstrate the reliable and systematic use of people's concept of intentionality, contrast it with the bewildering variety of related legal concepts, and apply the folk model of intentionality to debated distinctions between intention and intentionality, desire and intention, and belief and intention. This folk-conceptual approach promises clarity of mens rea concepts and a reconciliation of the legal and layperson's view of human behavior.

Awareness↗

PubMed2002

How people explain actions performed by groups and individuals.

The authors explore whether people explain intentional actions performed by groups differently from actions performed by individuals, A theoretical framework is offered that distinguishes between 2 modes of explanation: the agent's reasons (beliefs or desires in light of which the agent decided to act) and causal histories of reasons (CHRs; factors that preceded and brought about the agent's reasons). The authors develop the hypothesis that people use more CHR explanations when explaining group actions than when explaining individual actions. Study 1 demonstrates this asymmetry. Studies 2 and 3 explore 2 necessary conditions for the asymmetry: that the group be perceived as an aggregate of individual actors rather thin as a jointly acting group and that explainers have general information available about the group. Discussion focuses on people's perception of groups as entities and agents.

Humans↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Distant healing intention: definitions and evolving guidelines for laboratory studies.

This paper provides definitions and a discussion of evolving guidelines for conducting research on the effects of distant healing intention (DHI) on living systems in the laboratory. We consider the relevance of DHI laboratory research to applied healing, special theoretical challenges, and other considerations that distinguish DHI research from other domains of laboratory science. Two sample protocols for investigating DHI are provided, one involving the human autonomic nervous system as the "target" of distant intention, and the other involving cell cultures. In essence, DHI differs from other alternative healing modalities because it postulates that mental intention alone can affect living systems at a distance, unbounded by the usual constraints of both space and time. This postulate challenges scientific assumptions that often go unexamined, including the nature of causality, the distinction between subjective and objective states, and the efficacy of double-blind protocols in controlling for experimenters' intentions. Previous laboratory research in this domain suggests that DHI effects warrant serious study, but most scientists and funding agencies are unaware of the evidence or the relevant literature. By following these evolving guidelines, researchers' designs and their ultimate publications will conform more closely to the quality standards expected by scientific journals, and such publications will in turn attract the attention of a broader range of scientists. This seems especially important for alternative healing research in general and for distant healing in particular; both realms enjoy broad public support but have largely eluded serious attention by mainstream science.

Brain↗