检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:张学义[1,2] 郭喨 ZHANG Xueyi;GUO Liang(Department of Philosophy and Science,Southeast University,Nanjing,Jiangsu,214135;The Think Tank for Moral Development of Jiangsu Province,Nanjing,Jiangsu,211189;Center for Science,Technology and Law,Zhejiang University,Hangzhou,Zhejiang,310008)
机构地区:[1]东南大学哲学与科学系,江苏南京214135 [2]江苏省道德发展智库,江苏南京211189 [3]浙江大学科技与法律研究中心,浙江杭州310008
出 处:《自然辩证法通讯》2022年第7期94-103,共10页Journal of Dialectics of Nature
基 金:中央高校基本科研业务费项目“科学理解的实验哲学研究”(项目编号:2242021S20007);浙江大学医学院卫生政策与医院管理研究专项课题(项目编号:2019WSZC023);江苏省道德发展智库阶段性成果。
摘 要:自2019年岁末新型冠状病毒肺炎疫情发生以来,全国上下共战疫情、共克时艰。为深入了解疫情期间公众的专家信任和社会道德态度的变化,在疫情最为胶着的2020年2月中旬,课题组进行了为期5天、样本总量为10896的在线调查。调查分析表明:(1)公众对医药卫生方面的专家信任显著提升,引发了专家“人格信任”复兴,“系统信任”增强;(2)对一般意义上的专家群体的信任度无明显变化,专家信任的“豪猪困境”依然存在并持续有效,公众继续陷在虽不信任专家、但又不得不信任的“专家塔西佗陷阱”中;(3)科学事实“政治化”与新媒体的“特殊催化”,使得专家信任复杂化;(4)锤炼专业技能,强化职业伦理教育依然是专家群体走出信任危机的首要途径。Since the outbreak of COVID-19 Epidemic,the whole country has worked together to overcome the challenge.In order to understand the changes in public trust in experts and social moral attitudes during the epidemic,a 5-day large-scale online survey with a total sample size of 10,896 was conducted.The survey shows that:(1)the public’s trust in medical and health experts has been significantly improved,which has led to the revival of expert“personality trust”and the enhancement of“system trust”;(2)there is no obvious change in the trust of other experts;the“porcupine dilemma”of experts’trust still exists:the public has fallen into the“Expert Tacitus Trap”;(3)“politicization”of scientific facts and the“special catalysis”of new media complicate the trust;(4)develop professional skills and strengthen professional ethics education is the primary way for experts to win the trust of the public.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.49