ORCID Profile
0000-0002-6475-4368
Current Organisations
Charles Sturt University
,
Northeastern University
Does something not look right? The information on this page has been harvested from data sources that may not be up to date. We continue to work with information providers to improve coverage and quality. To report an issue, use the Feedback Form.
In Research Link Australia (RLA), "Research Topics" refer to ANZSRC FOR and SEO codes. These topics are either sourced from ANZSRC FOR and SEO codes listed in researchers' related grants or generated by a large language model (LLM) based on their publications.
Philosophy | Decision Theory | History and Philosophy of Science (incl. Non-historical Philosophy of Science) | Epistemology |
Management | Expanding Knowledge in Philosophy and Religious Studies | Technological and Organisational Innovation
Publisher: Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Date: 12-2014
DOI: 10.1086/677695
Abstract: In this paper, I argue against Andreasen and Sesardic, who have both claimed that recent cluster results in population genetics serve as evidence that the human species contains, or at least once contained, subspecies. I show that the cluster results are in fact evidentially inert relative to each author’s preferred subspecies concept. I then sketch the kinds of biological facts that could be used to push the debate further.
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 09-02-2014
DOI: 10.1111/JAPP.12053
Publisher: Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy
Date: 03-01-2018
Abstract: Abstract here.
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 10-03-2022
DOI: 10.1002/ASI.24637
Abstract: In the online information ecosystem, a content label is an attachment to a piece of content intended to contextualize that content for the viewer. Content labels are information about information, such as fact‐checks or sensitive content warnings. Research into content labeling is nascent, but growing researchers have made strides toward understanding labeling best practices to deal with issues such as disinformation, and misleading content that may affect everything from voting to health. To make this review tractable, we focus on compiling the literature that can contextualize labeling effects and consequences. This review summarizes the central labeling literature, highlights gaps for future research, discusses considerations for social media, and explores definitions toward a taxonomy. Specifically, this article discusses the particulars of content labels, their presentation, and the effects of various labels. The current literature can guide the usage of labels on social media platforms and inform public debate over platform moderation.
Publisher: Center for Open Science
Date: 03-12-2018
Abstract: Discussions of the non-identity problem presuppose a widely shared intuition that actions or policies that change who comes into existence don't, thereby, become morally unproblematic. We hypothesize that this intuition isn’t generally shared by the public, which could have widespread implications concerning how to generate support for large-scale, identity-affecting policies relating to matters like climate change. To test this, we ran a version of the well-known dictator game designed to mimic the public's behavior over identity-affecting choices. We found the public does seem to behave more selfishly when making identity-affecting choices, which should be concerning. We further hypothesized that one possible mechanism is the notion of harm the public uses in their decision-making and find that substantial portions of the population seem to each employ distinct notions of harm in their normative thinking. These findings raise puzzling features about the public’s normative thinking that call out for further empirical examination.
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 05-04-2018
Publisher: Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Date: 12-2011
DOI: 10.1086/662266
Abstract: Even though social scientists continue to discuss the problems posed by self-fulfilling and self-frustrating predictions, philosophers of science have ignored the topic since the 1970s. Back then, the prevailing view was that the methodological problems posed by reflexive predictions are either minor or easily avoided. I believe that this consensus was premature, ultimately relying on an overly narrow understanding of the phenomenon. I present an improved way to understand reflexive predictions (framed in probabilistic terms) and show that, once such predictions are understood this way, the methodological problems they pose may turn out to be neither minor nor easily avoided.
Publisher: Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Date: 06-2012
DOI: 10.1017/EPI.2012.3
Abstract: In Knowledge in a Social World , Alvin Goldman presents a framework to quantify the epistemic effects that various policies, procedures, and behaviors can have on a group of agents. In this essay, I show that the framework requires some modifications when applied to agents with credences. The required modifications carry with them an interesting consequence, namely, that any group whose members disagree can become more accurate by forming a consensus through averaging their credences. I sketch a way that this result can be used to show that in idual norms of rationality and group norms of rationality can dictate conflicting behaviors for the members of some groups. I conclude by discussing how some of the assumptions used to generate the consensus result might be loosened.
Publisher: White Horse Press
Date: 04-2017
DOI: 10.3197/096327117X14847335385553
Abstract: Game theorists tend to model climate negotiations as a so-called 'tragedy of the commons'. This is rather worrisome, since the conditions under which such commons problems have historically been solved are almost entirely absent in the case of international greenhouse gas emissions. In this paper, I will argue that the predictive accuracy of the tragedy model might not stem from the model's inherent match with reality but rather from the model's ability to make self-fulfilling predictions. I then sketch some possible ways to dispel the tragedy, including (1) recognising some ways the assumptions of the model fail, (2) taking seriously recent work suggesting that increasing greenhouse gas emissions is not in most nations' own self-interest, and (3) preferring alternative models like collective risk dilemmas, bargaining games, or cooperative models.
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 16-01-2015
Publisher: SAGE Publications
Date: 1990
DOI: 10.1177/20539517231176230
Abstract: Embedding ethics modules within computer science courses has become a popular response to the growing recognition that computer science programs need to better equip their students to navigate the ethical dimensions of computing technologies such as artificial intelligence, machine learning, and big data analytics. However, the popularity of this approach has outpaced the evidence of its positive outcomes. To help close that gap, this empirical study reports positive results from Northeastern University's program that embeds values analysis modules into computer science courses. The resulting data suggest that such modules have a positive effect on students’ moral attitudes and that students leave the modules believing they are more prepared to navigate the ethical dimensions they will likely face in their eventual careers. Importantly, these gains were accomplished at an institution without a philosophy doctoral program, suggesting this strategy can be effectively employed by a wider range of institutions than many have thought.
Publisher: Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Date: 21-10-2021
DOI: 10.1017/APA.2021.1
Abstract: Discussions of the nonidentity problem presuppose a widely shared intuition that actions or policies that change who comes into existence do not, thereby, become morally unproblematic. We hypothesize that this intuition is not generally shared by the public, which could have widespread implications concerning how to generate support for large-scale, identity-affecting policies relating to matters like climate change. To test this, we ran a version of the well-known dictator game designed to mimic the public's behavior over identity-affecting choices. We found the public does seem to behave more selfishly when making identity-affecting choices, which should be concerning. We further hypothesized that one possible mechanism is the notion of harm the public uses in their decision making and find that substantial portions of the population seem to each employ distinct notions of harm in their normative thinking. These findings raise puzzling features about the public's normative thinking that call out for further empirical examination.
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 23-06-2016
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 21-12-2015
DOI: 10.1111/RATI.12131
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 04-05-2021
Start Date: 2018
End Date: 2020
Funder: Australian Research Council
View Funded ActivityStart Date: 01-2018
End Date: 08-2020
Amount: $357,008.00
Funder: Australian Research Council
View Funded Activity