“谁,基于当事人的可变性,为什么要用“游戏”来诱导高中生的思考和商议

Hiroshi NONAMI, Go SAKAMOTO, Yutaka TASHIRO, Shoji OHTOMO, Toshiaki AOKI, Kentaro OBA
{"title":"“谁,基于当事人的可变性,为什么要用“游戏”来诱导高中生的思考和商议","authors":"Hiroshi NONAMI, Go SAKAMOTO, Yutaka TASHIRO, Shoji OHTOMO, Toshiaki AOKI, Kentaro OBA","doi":"10.5647/jsoee.2206","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A tendency to prioritize the rights of concerned parties unquestioningly was consequently observed among people around the location of not-in-my-backyard (NIMBY) facilities—a phenomenon which is defined as superior legitimization of the concerned parties. However, this is an intuitive decision that results in irrational goals, such as non-completion of public goods. The multipolarization of concerned parties, wherein two or more concerned parties hold conflicting interests, is hypothesized to induce intentional consideration that inhibits intuitive decisions. High-school students played a simulation game, “Who & Why Game (WWG),” in which they were tasked to deliberate about the legitimate rights to decide the placement of a high-level radioactive waste storage facility as one of four roles; namely, a local resident, an expert commission member, a national majority, or a government agency. Their superior legitimization of the local resident was inhibited when future generations were presented as another concerned party having a conflict of interest with the local resident. Finally, the usefulness of the WWG was discussed theoretically.","PeriodicalId":478540,"journal":{"name":"Kankyō kyōiku","volume":"48 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"“Who & Why Game” for Inducing Consideration and Deliberation among High-school Students Based on the Variability of Concerned Parties\",\"authors\":\"Hiroshi NONAMI, Go SAKAMOTO, Yutaka TASHIRO, Shoji OHTOMO, Toshiaki AOKI, Kentaro OBA\",\"doi\":\"10.5647/jsoee.2206\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"A tendency to prioritize the rights of concerned parties unquestioningly was consequently observed among people around the location of not-in-my-backyard (NIMBY) facilities—a phenomenon which is defined as superior legitimization of the concerned parties. However, this is an intuitive decision that results in irrational goals, such as non-completion of public goods. The multipolarization of concerned parties, wherein two or more concerned parties hold conflicting interests, is hypothesized to induce intentional consideration that inhibits intuitive decisions. High-school students played a simulation game, “Who & Why Game (WWG),” in which they were tasked to deliberate about the legitimate rights to decide the placement of a high-level radioactive waste storage facility as one of four roles; namely, a local resident, an expert commission member, a national majority, or a government agency. Their superior legitimization of the local resident was inhibited when future generations were presented as another concerned party having a conflict of interest with the local resident. Finally, the usefulness of the WWG was discussed theoretically.\",\"PeriodicalId\":478540,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Kankyō kyōiku\",\"volume\":\"48 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Kankyō kyōiku\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5647/jsoee.2206\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kankyō kyōiku","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5647/jsoee.2206","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

因此,在“邻避”设施周围的人们中,可以毫无疑问地观察到一种优先考虑有关各方权利的倾向——这种现象被定义为有关各方的优越合法化。然而,这是一种直觉性的决策,导致了不合理的目标,如公共产品的不完成。有关各方的多极化,即两个或多个有关各方持有相互冲突的利益,被认为会导致有意的考虑,从而抑制直觉决策。高中生们玩了一个模拟游戏“谁和为什么游戏(WWG)”,在这个游戏中,他们被要求作为四个角色之一,讨论决定高放射性废物储存设施安置的合法权利;即当地居民、专家委员会成员、国民多数派或政府机构。当后代被视为与当地居民有利益冲突的另一个相关方时,他们对当地居民的优越合法性就被抑制了。最后,从理论上讨论了WWG的实用性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
“Who & Why Game” for Inducing Consideration and Deliberation among High-school Students Based on the Variability of Concerned Parties
A tendency to prioritize the rights of concerned parties unquestioningly was consequently observed among people around the location of not-in-my-backyard (NIMBY) facilities—a phenomenon which is defined as superior legitimization of the concerned parties. However, this is an intuitive decision that results in irrational goals, such as non-completion of public goods. The multipolarization of concerned parties, wherein two or more concerned parties hold conflicting interests, is hypothesized to induce intentional consideration that inhibits intuitive decisions. High-school students played a simulation game, “Who & Why Game (WWG),” in which they were tasked to deliberate about the legitimate rights to decide the placement of a high-level radioactive waste storage facility as one of four roles; namely, a local resident, an expert commission member, a national majority, or a government agency. Their superior legitimization of the local resident was inhibited when future generations were presented as another concerned party having a conflict of interest with the local resident. Finally, the usefulness of the WWG was discussed theoretically.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信