insert-transcript#23b0b310-cc83-4c71-8eeb-c7fae6b565af-here
Mikhail, 2014 table 2
insert-transcript#d085a7d9-dff5-44fa-8f05-103533d933ed-here
Fini, Brass, & Committeri (2015, p. figure 1, part)
Done in VR
Measure:
Judgment’s transition threshold (JTT) = ‘The point where participants expressed a
transition from “Far” to “Near” (descending series) and from “Near” to “Far” (ascending series)’
Suppose you are asked to judge whether an object is near or far from you.
Your judgements can be influenced by
whether another person is in the scene and able to interact with the object
(Fini et al., 2015). Yet the judgement you are making is
supposed to be about the distance between you and an object; the distance
from another person and that person’s ability to interact with the object
are irrelevant considerations.
insert-transcript#98613e9b-92dd-48d0-a824-f1fafda5a747-here
Schwitzgebel & Cushman, 2015 figure 2 (part)
order effects.
(Schwitzgebel & Cushman, 2015, p. figure~2 (part))
Potentially two problems here:
(i) order effects themselves [main point]; and
(ii) reflection makes people more consistent (which seems not expected
given the language analogy—should not get change towards truth; does the
language analogy imply that reflection takes you away from the truth
about ethical attributes of particular actions (as it does for linguistic judgements)?)
insert-transcript#24556233-a604-4d1d-81d3-904f6f0a331f-here
Mikhail (2014, p. table 2)
Are framing effects are a problem for Mikhail’s argument?
Framing effects are a problem for Mikhail’s first premise ...
∞todo update: affect heuristic is, in effect, claim about framinig effects
(that disgust frames). This means, contrary to what i said before,
ythat framing effects are problems for both views (Mikhail’s & affect heuristic).