Nature reviews psychology最新文献

Fairness plays a vital role in daily life, ensuring that every individual is treated equitably within society. This concept is closely linked to cooperation, in that cooperation often depends on individuals believing that they will be treated fairly and that fairness norms will be enforced. Ultimately, fairness is based on the principle that people should be treated in the way they deserve.

Fairness can be maintained among people through two mechanisms: compensation and punishment. Compensation seeks to rectify the harm or loss experienced by victims of unfair behaviour. Punishment aims to administer appropriate and just consequences to people who behave in a way that violates established norms. These mechanisms might depend on kin relationships and repeated interactions. From an evolutionary perspective, cooperation is easier to maintain among genetically related individuals, as fairness among relatives supports genetic survival. In scenarios with expected future encounters, the anticipation of reciprocity fosters cooperation. Thus, kinship and the anticipation of future interactions promote trust and long-term cooperation, making fairness through compensation and punishment beneficial.

As a disabled autistic scientist, I often find myself reading research articles and studies that depict autistic individuals as incapable, aloof, uninterested and unempathetic. For decades, the literature has characterized autism as a complex neurodevelopmental disability that leads to challenges with social communication. These challenges are often placed on the individual, resulting in interventions seeking to change how the autistic individual behaves and interacts.

For a while, that is what I believed of myself: an individual who could never fit in because I lacked empathy and was socially aloof. Science explained that autism was the reason why I found friendships hard to acquire and maintain and why social communication was a challenge. Thus, I had to change to overcome these challenges. But change how?

Forgetting can result from passive or active processes. Active forgetting includes purposefully trying to forget or retrieve competing information. Knowledge about active forgetting in humans is largely derived from controlled laboratory experiments, but similar forgetting occurs in everyday settings. In this Review, we discuss two major categories of active forgetting: one in which a person aims to forget (intentional forgetting), and the other in which a person does not (unintentional forgetting). In the laboratory, intentional forgetting occurs when a person forgets information after being directed to do so. Outside the laboratory, intentional forgetting occurs when unwanted information is forgotten volitionally, such as an incorrectly stated phone number or an upsetting experience. Unintentional forgetting in the laboratory occurs when retrieving information from memory actively induces the forgetting of related information. Unintentional forgetting outside the laboratory can also be trivial, such as which pumpkin your child selected at the pumpkin patch, or consequential, such as forgetting which jacket was worn by a perpetrator when witnessing a crime. We review efforts to map laboratory results onto everyday forgetting and make recommendations for future research, addressing everyday forgetting as well as clinical applications.