Beneficence - Explore the Science & Experts | ideXlab

Scan Science and Technology

Contact Leading Edge Experts & Companies


The Experts below are selected from a list of 324 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Richard M Ryan – 1st expert on this subject based on the ideXlab platform

  • correction to distinguishing between basic psychological needs and basic wellness enhancers the case of Beneficence as a candidate psychological need
    Motivation and Emotion, 2020
    Co-Authors: Frank Martela, Richard M Ryan


    The authors would like to correct the following error in the publication of the original article: The appendix 1 was missing and will hereby be added. The appendix contains the four items for the Beneficence frustration scale to assess antisocial impact.

  • Distinguishing between basic psychological needs and basic wellness enhancers: the case of Beneficence as a candidate psychological need
    Motivation and Emotion, 2019
    Co-Authors: Frank Martela, Richard M Ryan


    In order to be considered a basic psychological need, a candidate need should fulfill several criteria, including need satisfaction having a unique positive effect on well-being, and need frustration having a unique effect on ill-being, properties demonstrated by autonomy, competence and relatedness. Previous research has demonstrated that Beneficence satisfaction—the sense of having a positive impact on other people—can have a unique positive effect on well-being. In the present study, we examined whether Beneficence frustration—the sense of having a negative impact on other people—would be uniquely connected to ill-being. In the first study (N = 332; Mage  = 38) we developed a scale to assess Beneficence frustration. Then, in two subsequent cross-sectional studies (N = 444 and N = 426; Mage  = 38/36) Beneficence frustration is correlated with indicators of ill-being (negative affect, depression, anxiety, physical symptoms), but this connection disappears when controlling for the effects of autonomy, competence and relatedness need frustrations. The three needs fully mediate relations between Beneficence frustration and all assessed well-being and ill-being indicators in both studies. This leads us to suggest a distinction between basic psychological needs and basic wellness enhancers, the satisfaction of which may improve well-being, but the neglect or frustration of which might not uniquely impact ill-being.

  • meaningfulness as satisfaction of autonomy competence relatedness and Beneficence comparing the four satisfactions and positive affect as predictors of meaning in life
    Journal of Happiness Studies, 2018
    Co-Authors: Frank Martela, Richard M Ryan, Michael F Steger


    Positive affect (PA) has consistently been shown to predict meaning in life (MIL). In one of the first investigations to examine multiple predictors of MIL simultaneously, we tested in three studies the hypothesis that satisfactions associated with being benevolent and fulfilling psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness are more central predictors of MIL, and could explain the correlation between PA and MIL. Study 1, a cross-sectional survey, regressed the four suggested factors and PA simultaneously on MIL, showing that all four emerged as independent predictors, whereas PA and MIL were no longer connected. Study 2 looked at recollections of meaningful situations, showing that all four satisfactions and PA emerged as independent predictors of situational meaning. Study 3 used a diary method to show that daily fluctuations in autonomy, competence, relatedness, Beneficence, and PA all simultaneously and independently predicted daily sense of meaning. However, a brief longitudinal study showed that whereas combined satisfaction of autonomy, competence, relatedness, and Beneficence at T1 predicted general sense of MIL at T2, PA did not. Together, these studies show that the four satisfactions consistently emerge as independent predictors of both general and short-term meaning, in some situations even accounting for the relation between PA and general MIL.

Ben Saunders – 2nd expert on this subject based on the ideXlab platform

  • procreative Beneficence intelligence and the optimization problem
    Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, 2015
    Co-Authors: Ben Saunders


    According to the Principle of Procreative Beneficence, reproducers should choose the child, of those available to them, expected to have the best life. Savulescu argues reproducers are therefore morally obligated to select for nondisease traits, such as intelligence. Carter and Gordon recently challenged this implication, arguing that Savulescu fails to establish that intelligence promotes well-being. This paper develops two responses. First, I argue that higher intelligence is likely to contribute to well-being on most plausible accounts. Second, I argue that, even if it does not, one can only resist the conclusion that reproducers should select on the basis of intelligence if its expected net effect is neutral. If intelligence reduces expected well-being, then reproducers should select offspring of low intelligence. More likely, the effect of increased intelligence on expected well-being varies at different levels, which makes identifying an optimum for well-being more complex than hitherto appreciated.

  • Is procreative Beneficence obligatory
    Journal of Medical Ethics, 2014
    Co-Authors: Ben Saunders


    Julian Savulescu defends the principle of procreative Beneficence, according to which parents have a prima facie moral obligation to choose the child with the best expected life. In this paper, I argue that Savulescu fails to show that procreative Beneficence is genuinely obligatory, because of his equivocation between moral reason and moral obligation. Savulescu assumes that morality requires us to do what we have most (moral) reason to do, but many deny this, for instance because they believe we have reasons (but no obligation) to perform supererogatory actions. Even if parents have moral reasons to choose the child with the best expected life, they may not be under any obligation to do so.

Johan Christiaan Bester – 3rd expert on this subject based on the ideXlab platform

  • Beneficence interests and wellbeing in medicine what it means to provide benefit to patients
    American Journal of Bioethics, 2020
    Co-Authors: Johan Christiaan Bester


    Beneficence is a foundational ethical principle in medicine. To provide benefit to a patient is to promote and protect the patient’s wellbeing, to promote the patient’s interests. But there are dif…