Supplemental Material for “There Are No Band-Aids for Emotions”: The Development of Thinking About Emotional Harm

Aims This study explores the prevalence of being a past-year affected other (AO) of a problem gambler by gender. The aims were to study the amount and type of gambling-related harms (GRHs) for subgroups of AOs and to distinguish GRH profiles for AO subgroups. Methods A total of 7186 adults aged 18 years and over participated in the Gambling Harms Survey evaluating year 2016. The data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and binary logistic regression. Results Of all respondents, 12.9% were defined as past-year AOs (women 13.7%; men 12.1%). The proportion of affected non-family members (ANFs) was 8.4%, and 5.6% were affected family members (AFMs). AFMs were usually women, and ANFs were usually men. Emotional, relationship, and financial harms were the most common types of harm. The odds of experiencing financial harm were highest for the 18- to 34-year-olds (OR 1.82) and for those whose partner/ex-partner had a gambling problem (OR 3.91). Having a parent/step-parent (OR 1.93) and child/stepchild (OR 3.64) increased the odds of experiencing emotional harm, whereas male gender (OR 0.50) and being an ANF (OR 0.58) decreased emotional harm. Relationship harm was evident for partners/ex-partners (OR 1.97–5.07). Conclusions GRH profiles for AO subgroups varied, which emphasizes the need for effective harm minimization strategies for those in need.

Download Full-text

Private Law Liability for Faulty ICT

Law for Computer Scientists and Other Folk ◽

10.1093/oso/9780198860877.003.0008 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 219-234

Author(s):

Mireille Hildebrandt

Keyword(s):

Strict Liability ◽

Tort Law ◽

Third Party ◽

Private Law ◽

Emotional Harm ◽

Fault Liability

This chapter considers instances where ICT applications cause physical, material, economic, or emotional harm, with a focus on third party liability or tort law. The chapter should be read as an important example of how private law liability may step in to deter the development, sale, or usage of faulty ICT. It discusses the relevant legal conditions of damage, causation, fault liability, and strict liability, ending with questions around compensation and deterrence as the overarching goals of tort law.

Download Full-text

“There are no band-aids for emotions”: The development of thinking about emotional harm.

Developmental Psychology ◽

10.1037/dev0001187 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 57 (6) ◽

pp. 913-926

Author(s):

Isobel A. Heck ◽

Jessica Bregant ◽

Katherine D. Kinzler

Keyword(s):

Emotional Harm

Download Full-text

Emotion in Imaginative Resistance

10.31234/osf.io/4bvfa ◽

2019 ◽

Author(s):

Dylan Campbell ◽

William Kidder ◽

Jason D'Cruz ◽

Brendan Gaesser

Keyword(s):

Individual Differences ◽

Negative Affect ◽

Moral Judgment ◽

Trait Anxiety ◽

Moral Beliefs ◽

High Severity ◽

Imaginative Resistance ◽

Emotional Harm

Imaginative resistance refers to cases in which one’s otherwise flexible imaginative capacity is constrained by an unwillingness or inability to imaginatively engage with a given claim. In three studies, we explored which imaginative demands engender resistance when imagining morally deviant worlds and whether individual differences in emotion predict the degree of this resistance. Participants read narratives containing either no harmful actions, harmful actions, or harmful actions with evaluative statements that the harms were morally justified, after which measures of moral judgment and imaginative resistance were assessed. In Study 1 (N = 176), participants resisted the notion that harmful actions could be morally acceptable regardless of the author’s claims about these actions but did not resist imagining that a perpetrator of harm could believe their actions to be morally acceptable. In Study 2 (N = 167) we replicated the findings of Study 1 and showed that imaginative resistance is greatest among participants who experience more negative affect in response to imagining harm and are lower in either trait anxiety or trait psychopathy. In Study 3 (N = 210) we show that this is the case even when the harms assessed include both low-severity (i.e., emotional harm) and high-severity (i.e., killing) cases. These findings suggest that people’s moral beliefs constrain their ability to imagine hypothetical moral alternatives, although this ability systematically varies on the basis of stable individual differences in emotion.

Download Full-text