Rich and famous: recognition-based judgment in the Sunday Times rich list

Recognition as a cue to judgment in a novel, multi-option domain (the Sunday Times Rich List) is explored. As in previous studies, participants were found to make use of name recognition as a cue to the presumed wealth of individuals. Names that were recognized were judged to be the richest name from amongst the set presented at above chance levels. This effect persisted across situations in which more than one name was recognized; recognition was used as an inclusion criterion for the sub-set of names to be considered the richest of the set presented. However, when the question was reversed, and a “poorest” judgment was required, use of recognition as an exclusion criterion was observed only when a single name was recognized. Reaction times when making these judgments also show a distinction between “richest” and “poorest” questions with recognition of none of the options taking the longest time to judge in the “richest” question condition and full recognition of all the names presented taking longest to judge in the “poorest” question condition. Implications for decision-making using simple heuristics are discussed.

Time to decide? Simplicity and congruity in comparative judgment

What is the relationship between magnitude judgments relying on directly available characteristics versus probabilistic cues? Question frame was manipulated in a comparative judgment task previously assumed to involve inference across a probabilistic mental model (e.g., “which city is largest” – the “larger” question – versus “which city is smallest” – the “smaller” question). Participants identified either the largest or smallest city (Experiments 1a, 2) or the richest or poorest person (Experiment 1b) in a three-alternative forced choice (3-AFC) task (Experiment 1) or 2-AFC task (Experiment 2). Response times revealed an interaction between question frame and the number of options recognized. When asked the smaller question, response times were shorter when none of the options were recognized. The opposite pattern was found when asked the larger question: response time was shorter when all options were recognized. These task-stimuli congruity results in judgment under uncertainty are consistent with, and predicted by, theories of magnitude comparison which make use of deductive inferences from declarative knowledge.

The aesthetics of ideology, or 'the critique of ideological judgment' in Eagleton and Zizek

The notions of ‘ideology’ and ‘critique of ideology’ have been criticised in many ways. This essay examines the works of two contemporary theorists who defend this theoretical category. Interestingly, both do this through pivotal recourse to categories drawn from modern aesthetic theory, and in particular Kant's third Critique. In this way, they reanimate a theoretical concern with the intersection of politics and aesthetics that goes as far back as Plato. The essay's conclusion reflects on this "aesthetic turn" in the theory of ideology: what work it allows, and its limits.

Trauma and holocaust video testimony : the intersection of history, memory, and judgment in the interview process

This article analyzes video testimonies recorded at the Jewish Holocaust Museum and Research Centre in Melbourne,Australia, which address the highly complex and sensitive issue of “privileged” Jews. The so-called privileged Jews include prisoners in the Nazi-operated camps and ghettos who held positions that gave them access to material and other benefits, while compelling them to act in ways that have been judged detrimental to fellow inmates. Although the issue of “privileged” Jews has been largely neglected, it relates to a crucial facet of the Holocaust and has vast implications for its aftermath. The ethical dilemmas facing these victims may be closely linked to what Lawrence Langer has termed choiceless choices, which challenge conventional notions of “judgment” and “responsibility.” This problem is also the primary subject of Auschwitz survivor Primo Levi’s essay titled “The Grey Zone,” which is arguably the most influential essay ever written on the Holocaust. Levi argues that one should abstain from judging individuals who confronted such extreme circumstances, positioning prisoners with “privileged” positions at the threshold of representation and understanding. However, moral evaluations of “privileged” Jews have a strong impact on Holocaust testimonies, whether these were constructed during the war or recorded long after the survivors’ experiences. The examples of video testimonies explored in this article reveal that this is particularly the case when interviewees are former “privileged” Jews and interviewers are themselves Holocaust survivors. The article argues that when confronted with such an emotionally and morally fraught issue, judgment may itself be seen as a “limit of representation.”

Beliefs, values, and action : the judgment model of cognitive distortions in sexual offenders

In this paper, we present the Judgment Model of Cognitive Distortions (JMCD), a new model of cognitive distortions that spans multiple levels of analysis and contains different types of judgments. This model proposes that cognitive distortions tend to cluster together in what we have termed Thematic Networks (TN): judgments about beliefs, values, and actions. We argue that the three sets of judgments cover all types of cognitive distortions apparent in sexual offenders including those revolving around content (i.e., asserting characteristics to people, the offender, the world) and cognitive operations (i.e., denial, minimization, rationalizations). Following a description of the JMCD, we demonstrate how it can account for the cognitive schemata identified in sexual offenders by researchers and clinicians. The paper concludes with a brief discussion of the clinical and research implications of the JMCD.