Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Keyword
-
- Decision making (2)
- Baier (1)
- Behavior (1)
- Capital punishment (1)
- Competition (1)
-
- Conduct (1)
- Conform (1)
- Copyright (1)
- Copyright infringement (1)
- Expert evidence (1)
- Fair use (Copyright) (1)
- Justification (1)
- Motivation (Psychology) (1)
- Natural inclinations (1)
- Precepts (1)
- Requirements (1)
- Retribution (1)
- Social standards (1)
- Standards (1)
- Timothy McVeigh (1)
- Trust (1)
- Victims (1)
- Victims of crimes (1)
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Social Psychology
The Moral Psychology Of Copyright Infringement, Christopher Buccafusco, David Fagundes
The Moral Psychology Of Copyright Infringement, Christopher Buccafusco, David Fagundes
Faculty Scholarship
Numerous recent cases illustrate that copyright owners sue for infringement even when an unauthorized use of their work causes them no economic harm. This presents a puzzle from the perspective of copyright theory as well as a serious social problem, since infringement suits designed to remedy non-economic harms tend to stifle rather than encourage creative production. While much scholarship has critiqued copyright’s economic theory from the perspective of authors’ incentives to create, ours is the first to explore this issue from the perspective of owners’ motivations to sue for infringement. We turn to moral psychology, and in particular to moral …
Missing Mcveigh, Michael E. Tigar
Knowing When To Trust Others: An Erp Study Of Decision-Making After Receiving Information From Unknown People, Cheryl Boudreau, Mathew D. Mccubbins, Seana Coulson
Knowing When To Trust Others: An Erp Study Of Decision-Making After Receiving Information From Unknown People, Cheryl Boudreau, Mathew D. Mccubbins, Seana Coulson
Faculty Scholarship
To address the neurocognitive mechanisms that underlie choices made after receiving information from an anonymous individual, reaction times (Experiment 1) and event-related brain potentials (Experiment 2) were recorded as participants played 3 variants of the Coin Toss game. In this game, participants guess the outcomes of unseen coin tosses after a person in another room (dubbed “the reporter”) observes the coin toss outcomes and then sends reports (which may or may not be truthful) to participants about whether the coins landed on heads or tails. Participants knew that the reporter's interests either were aligned with their own (Common Interests), opposed …
Nothing But The Truth? Experiments On Adversarial Competition, Expert Testimony, And Decision Making, Cheryl Boudreau, Mathew D. Mccubbins
Nothing But The Truth? Experiments On Adversarial Competition, Expert Testimony, And Decision Making, Cheryl Boudreau, Mathew D. Mccubbins
Faculty Scholarship
Many scholars debate whether a competition between experts in legal, political, or economic contexts elicits truthful information and, in turn, enables people to make informed decisions. Thus, we analyze experimentally the conditions under which competition between experts induces the experts to make truthful statements and enables jurors listening to these statements to improve their decisions. Our results demonstrate that, contrary to game theoretic predictions and contrary to critics of our adversarial legal system, competition induces enough truth telling to allow jurors to improve their decisions. Then, when we impose additional institutions (such as penalties for lying or the threat of …
On Justifying Enforced Requirements: A Reply To Baier, David B. Lyons
On Justifying Enforced Requirements: A Reply To Baier, David B. Lyons
Faculty Scholarship
There are limits to the possible subjects of justification. Typically, it concerns human behavior and things that human intervention can affect. Failing special circumstances, it makes no sense to speak of justifying the weather. There may be other limits to the class of possible subjects for justification; for example, it is sometimes said that a thing cannot be justified unless it has been indicted, though it is not clear how this claim should be taken. For there simply may be no point in bothering to justify something that is not suspect in some way, and the relevant condition can generally …