Not the End of the Story:Floris Balthasars’ Map of the Siege of Grave (1602) as a Book Illustration for <i>Den Nassauschen Lauren-Crans </i>(1610)

Central to this article are two maps by Floris Balthasarsz van Berckenrode, both on the siege of Grave (1602) by Maurice of Orange during the Dutch Revolt. The first map was in 1602 produced as a news map about the events, the second was a re-edition, published eight years later as a book illustration for Jan Jansz Orlers, Den Nassauschen Lauren-Crans (Leiden 1610). In this article, principles for a new method are introduced to analyse and compare these ‘story maps’ with particular attention to the narrative impact of the map. Using this method in combi-nation with (book) historical research, it argues that the 1610 map should be considered as a ‘memorial map’ that reframes the collective memory of the Dutch Revolt. It emphasizes the dynamic relationship between news, map and book publishing and pleads for a more prominent position of story maps and book illustrations in Early Modern memory landscapes

Learning Non-Utilitarian Moral Rules: Preference Reversals in Utilitarian Choice

Previous decision- making research has investigated factors that influence moral utilitarian choice involving human life including: personal involvement (Greene et al., 2001), accessibility to utilitarian information (Kusev et al., 2016), utility content (Gold et al., 2013), and utility ratio (Martin & Kusev, 2016). However, no experimental studies have investigated the influence of associative learning on moral choice, despite associative learning having been found to influence rational choice in non-morally sensitive decision- making tasks (Kusev et al., 2017). Accordingly, we devised an associative learning method/task in order to investigate whether newly learned moral rules induce rational utilitarian choice. Our results revealed that respondents who learned non-utilitarian moral rules were less utilitarian/rational than respondents who did not receive moral rule learning. We further demonstrated a preference reversal in utilitarian choice - from utilitarian- rational to utilitarian-irrational. The results therefore indicate that respondents follow learned non-utilitarian moral rules as opposed to utilitarian rules and strategy

Autonomous Self-Driving Cars: How Enhanced Utilitarian Accessibility Alters Consumer Purchase Intentions

Autonomous vehicles (AVs) are anticipated to prevent approximately 90% of road accidents (Fagnant & Kockelman, 2015), however, there will still be occasions where AVs face unavoidable collisions. Yet, AVs can be pre-programmed to make split-second life- saving decisions. Nonetheless, the question remains as to whether they should be programmed to maximise the number of lives saved (utilitarian) or protect the passenger at all costs. Importantly, experimental research by Bonnefon et al. (2016) revealed a ‘social dilemma’ – where respondents exhibit a preference for other people to own utilitarian cars but want to purchase protective cars for themselves. Here we argue that this result was simply an artefact of limited accessibility to utilitarian information (Kusev et al., 2016; Martin et al., 2017). Accordingly, our research reveals that accessibility (agency involvement) to utilitarian information predicts respondents moral and purchasing judgments about utilitarian and passenger protective AVs for others and themselves (agency type)

Autonomous vehicles: How perspective-taking accessibility alters moral judgments and consumer purchasing behavior

In preparation for unavoidable collisions, autonomous vehicle (AV) manufacturers could program their cars with utilitarian ethical algorithms that maximize the number of lives saved during a crash. However, recent research employing hypothetical AV crash scenarios reveals that people are not willing to purchase a utilitarian AV despite judging them to be morally appropriate (Bonnefon, Shariff, & Rahwan, 2016). This important result, indicating evidence for a social dilemma, has not yet been psychologically explored by behavioral scientists. In order to address the psychological underpinnings of this phenomenon, we developed and tested a novel theoretical proposal – perspective-taking accessibility (PT accessibility). Accordingly, we established that providing participants with access to both situational perspectives (AV buyers can be passengers or pedestrians) in crash scenarios, eliminated the behavioral inconsistency between their utilitarian judgments of moral appropriateness and non-utilitarian purchasing behavior. Moreover, our full PT accessibility induced respondents' utilitarian prosocial judgments and purchasing behavior (Experiments 1a and 1b) and consistent utilitarian preferences across judgment tasks (Experiment 2). Crucially, with full PT accessibility, participants' utilitarian purchasing behavior as well as their willingness to buy and ride utilitarian AVs were informed by their utilitarian moral judgments. Full PT accessibility provides the participants with even odds of being a pedestrian or passenger in crash scenarios, and thus impartiality. It could be argued that full PT accessibility is a new type of ‘veil of ignorance’, which is not based on purposely induced self-interest and uneven risk options (as in Huang, Greene, & Bazerman, 2019), but rather is based on even odds of being a passenger or pedestrian, and therefore with even 50/50 chance to die/live as passenger or pedestrian. Under these circumstances one can measure utilitarian preferences

How perspective-taking accessibility eliminates the moral hypocrisy between people’s moral judgments and moral behavior.

In preparation for road collisions, Autonomous Vehicles (AVs) can be programmed to save the greatest number of lives (utilitarian) or save the passenger at all costs (passenger- protective). In a series of studies, Bonnefon et al. (2016) revealed a moral hypocrisy between peoples’ moral judgments and behaviors; people do not want to buy the utilitarian AV that they judge to be the most moral. I argue that the cause for this moral hypocrisy is partial perspective-taking (PT) accessibility in hypothetical scenarios (only the perspective of the passenger is accessible to participants). I demonstrate that presenting full PT accessibility (the perspective of the passenger and pedestrians) to participants eliminates the moral hypocrisy. In particular, informed by their utilitarian moral judgments, participants are more willing to ride, buy, and spend money on utilitarian than passenger-protective AVs. These novel findings provide AV manufacturers and policymakers with new evidence regarding consumers’ ethical preferences for AVs

Automated computational cognitive-modeling: goal-specific analysis for large websites

The information architecture of websites is the most important remaining source of usability problems. Therefore, this research explores automated cognitive computational analysis of the information architecture of large websites as a basis for improvement. To support goal-specific analysis, an enhanced model of web navigation was implemented with a novel database-oriented approach. Web navigation was simulated on the information architecture of two large sites. With the improved labeling system of the information architecture, simulation results showed a significant reduction in navigation problems. The results of two experiments demonstrate that sites with improved information architecture result in better outcomes of user information retrieval. Our database-oriented approach is extensible, allowing non-goal-specific analysis, modeling of nontext media content, and analysis of the organization- and navigation systems of information architectures.</jats:p

Conclusions and recommendations

Work will continue. The Water-and-Climate ball is rolling and there is a strong commitment to keep it going. This wrapup chapter contains a ten-point action agenda for countries, river basin authorities, regional organisations and the international development community. Contents: 6.1 Undeniable evidence; 6.2 Challenges for water managers; 6.3 Stakeholder partnerships; 6.4 Assessing vulnerability to climate extremes; 6.5 Capacity building and financial support; 6.6 A Water and Climate Alliance; 6.7 Recommendations for Actio