Search

Philosophers have argued that stakes affect knowledge: a given amount of evidence may suffice for knowledge if the stakes are low, but not if the stakes are high. By contrast, empirical work on the influence of stakes on ordinary knowledge ascriptions has been divided along methodological lines: “evidence-fixed” prompts rarely find stakes effects, while “evidence-seeking” prompts consistently find them. We present a cross-cultural study using both evidence-fixed and evidence-seeking prompts with a diverse sample of 17 populations in 11 countries, speaking 14 languages. Our study is the first to use an evidence-seeking prompt cross-culturally, and includes several previously untested populations (including indigenous populations). Across cultures, we do not find evidence of a stakes effect with our evidence-fixed prompt, but do with our evidence-seeking prompt. We argue that the divergent results reveal a tension within folk epistemology: people's beliefs about when it is appropriate to ascribe knowledge differ significantly from their actual practice in ascribing knowledge.

Wisdom is the hallmark of social judgment, but how people across cultures recognize wisdom remains unclear—distinct philosophical traditions suggest different views of wisdom’s cardinal features. We explore perception of wise minds across 16 socio-economically and culturally diverse convenience samples from 12 countries. Participants assessed wisdom exemplars, non-exemplars, and themselves on 19 socio-cognitive characteristics, subsequently rating targets’ wisdom, knowledge, and understanding. Analyses reveal two positively related dimensions—Reflective Orientation and Socio-Emotional Awareness. These dimensions are consistent across the studied cultural regions and interact when informing wisdom ratings: wisest targets—as perceived by participants—score high on both dimensions, whereas the least wise are not reflective but moderately socio-emotional. Additionally, individuals view themselves as less reflective but more socio-emotionally aware than most wisdom exemplars. Our findings expand folk psychology and social judgment research beyond the Global North, showing how individuals perceive desirable cognitive and socio-emotional qualities, and contribute to an understanding of mind perception.

Philosophers have argued that stakes affect knowledge: a given amount of evidence may suffice for knowledge if the stakes are low, but not if the stakes are high. By contrast, empirical work on the influence of stakes on ordinary knowledge ascriptions has been divided along methodological lines: “evidence-fixed” prompts rarely find stakes effects, while “evidence-seeking” prompts consistently find them. We present a cross-cultural study using both evidence-fixed and evidence-seeking prompts with a diverse sample of 17 populations in 11 countries, speaking 14 languages. Our study is the first to use an evidence-seeking prompt cross-culturally, and includes several previously untested populations (including indigenous populations). Across cultures, we do not find evidence of a stakes effect with our evidence-fixed prompt, but do with our evidence-seeking prompt. We argue that the divergent results reveal a tension within folk epistemology: people's beliefs about when it is appropriate to ascribe knowledge differ significantly from their actual practice in ascribing knowledge.

The ISO27005 is an international standard that gives recommendation on IT Security Risk Management Methods. In this short paper we outline a criteria framework to analysis 7 of the major IT security risk methodology used. This framework can be used by organizations to select the appropriated methodology to fit their organizations risk posture and risk environment.

The SciPro system is developed at the Department of Computer and Systems Sciences, Stockholm University, Sweden. The overall purpose is to support all stakeholders in the academic thesis production process: students, supervisors, administrators and employers (public/private sector). The scientific process is essentially the same regardless of academic level: bachelor, master or PhD. The SciPro system supports all levels from start to finish. The workshop target academic staff and business sector representatives. All aspects of SciPro will be demonstrated, tested and discussed in the workshop. The systems consist of 14 integrated modules from the “Idea bank” to the anti-plagiarism check of the final thesis. One of the topics discussed in the work shop is the relevance and adaptations needed of SciPro for the Sri Lankan context. It is believed that the quality and efficiency of management of the theses can be improved by using SciPro. Furthermore SciPro has the potential to bridge the gap between the university and business by increasing relevance of thesis topics and by making the supervision process transparent and collaborative with academic and business supervisors working in teams., Work shop paper. Post conference