Comfort model for automobile seat

Comfort on automobile seats is lived daily by thousands of drivers. Epistemologically, comfort can be understood under the theory of complexity, since it emerges from a chain of interrelationships between man and several elements of the system. This interaction process can engender extreme comfort associated to the feeling of pleasure and wellbeing or, on the other hand, lead to discomfort, normally followed by pain. This article has for purpose the development of a theoretical model that favours the comfort feature on automobile seats through the identification of its facets and indicators. For such, a theoretical study is resorted to, allowing the mapping of elements that constitute the model. The results present a comfort model on automobile seats that contemplates the (physical, psychological, object, context and environment) facets. This model is expected to contribute with the automobile industry for the development of improvements of the ergonomic project of seats to increase the comfort noticed by the users.     

NORMS OF PUNISHMENT: EXPERIMENTS WITH STUDENTS AND THE GENERAL POPULATION

Norms of cooperation and punishment differ across societies, but also within a single society. In an experiment with two subject pools sharing the same geographical and cultural origins, we show that opportunities for peer punishment increase cooperation among students but not in the general population. In previous studies, punishment magnified the differences across societies in people's ability to cooperate. Here, punishment reversed the order: with punishment, students cooperate more than the general population while they cooperate less without it. (JEL C72, C90, Z13)     

A tale of two cities: an experiment on inequality and preferences

Theory and Decision - The existence of a strong link between socio-economic background and individual preferences has been documented among both children and grown-ups. Here, we study whether such...     

Deception in psychology: moral costs and benefits of unsought self-knowledge

Is it ethically permissible to use deception in psychological experiments? We argue that, provided some requirements are satisfied, it is possible to use deceptive methods without producing significant harm to research participants and without any significant violation of their autonomy. We also argue that methodological deception is at least at the moment the only effective means by which one can acquire morally significant information about certain behavioral tendencies. Individuals in general, and research participants in particular, gain self-knowledge which can help them improve their autonomous decision-making. The community gains collective self-knowledge that, once shared, can play a role in shaping education, informing policies and in general creating a more efficient and just society.