Bridging Political Divides by Correcting the Basic Morality Bias

2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Curtis Puryear ◽  
Emily Kubin ◽  
Chelsea Schein ◽  
Yochanan Bigman ◽  
Kurt Gray

Efforts to bridge political divides often focus on navigating complex and divisive issues. However, nine studies suggest that we should also focus on a more basic moral divide: the erroneous belief that political opponents lack a fundamental sense of right and wrong. This “basic morality bias” is tied to political dehumanization and is revealed by multiple methods, including natural language analyses from a large Twitter corpus, and a representative survey of Americans with incentives for accuracy. In the US, both Democrats and Republicans substantially overestimate the number of political outgroup members who approve of blatant wrongs (e.g., child pornography, embezzlement). Importantly, the basic morality bias can be corrected with a brief, scalable intervention. Providing information that just one political opponent condemns blatant wrongs increases willingness to work with political opponents and substantially decreases political dehumanization.

2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 54-57
Author(s):  
FRANCO BRUNI ◽  

The article is devoted to problems in relations between the EU and Russia. Multiple methods are considered that are aimed at solving the problem of multilateralism in current conditions. The author selected and studied specific documents on essential aspects that are devoted to this topic. Studying the arising problems requires careful consideration since, in the modern world, cooperation between global actors such as the EU and Russia cannot be ignored. Despite all the challenges faced by the parties in their fields, all difficulties are conquerable, and the article provides specific methods for its solving. The article discusses some aspects and problems that require particular attention from specialists in this field. The author concludes that strong US–EU coalition could seem more coherent with history and with the traditional East–West divide. However, the recent evolution of the US attitude towards international relations weakens the probability of such coalition and its perceived payoffs. A more or less defensive Russia–China coalition has been tried with limited results; moreover, if it were possible and probable, the two western players would change their strategy to prevent it or to contain its depth. In fact, we live in a world where many talks of a serious possibility of G2 governance, a peculiar type of coalition where the US and China keep hostile and nationalistic attitudes but join forces to set the global stage in their favor, pursuing a qualitatively limited but quantitatively rich payoff. In such world, as a counterpart of this payoff, both the divided Europe and the economically much smaller Russia would lose power and suffer several kinds of economic disadvantages. Therefore, Greater Europe would be good for Russia and for the EU as well.


Author(s):  
Phillip Osial ◽  
Arnold Kim ◽  
Kalle Kauranen

Despite rapid advancements in technology, the healthcare industry is known to lag behind when it comes to adopting new changes. Most often, when a new technology such as CPOE or EHR systems presents themselves in the healthcare industry, clinicians are left struggling to keep up with their workloads while learning to adjust a new workflow. Instead of disrupting the clinician's clinical workflow, the authors propose a system for transforming clinical narratives presented in the form of discharge summaries from the i2b2 Natural Language Processing dataset into a standardized order set. The proposed system uses natural language processing techniques based on Scala, which extracts discharge summary information about a patient and is proven to be highly scalable. The goal of this system is to increase interoperability between CPOE systems by performing further transformations on the extracted data. The authors adhere to HL7's FHIR standards and use JSON as the primary medical messaging format, which is used both in the US and international healthcare industry organizations and companies.


2009 ◽  
Vol 92 (3) ◽  
pp. S90
Author(s):  
J.E. Anderson ◽  
L. Warner ◽  
D.J. Jamieson ◽  
D.M. Kissin ◽  
A.K. Nangia ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Jon Kingzette

Abstract Scholars, the media, and ordinary people alike express alarm at the apparent loathing between Democrats and Republicans in the mass public. However, the evidence of such loathing typically comes from survey items that measure attitudes toward the Democratic and Republican Parties, rather than attitudes toward ordinary partisans. Using a nationally representative survey, I find that Democrats and Republicans have substantially more positive feelings toward ordinary people belonging to the opposing party than they do toward politicians in the opposing party and the opposing party itself. These results indicate that research relying on measures of feelings toward the opposing “Party” vastly overstates levels of partisan animosity in the American public and demonstrate the need to distinguish between attitudes toward party elites and ordinary partisans in future research.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document