THEMATIC GROUPS

Details

Parent Category: THEMATIC GROUPS

Category: Ethics, Values and Planning

Published: 05 March 2023

Annual conference of TG on Ethics, Values & Planning

Breaking through ‘conformorality’ in urban and regional studies (14 & 15 September 2023, Dortmund)

The conference takes its inspiration from The Grievance Studies Affair (2017/2018), a controversial experiment in which three researchers, using pseudonyms, published bizarre articles without scientific evidence but conforming to conventional, broadly accepted moral views. The team demonstrated that it is easier to get published in peer-reviewed scientific journals if one’s articles adhere to (and reinforce) certain mainstream viewpoints. The project’s findings exemplify what, in the literature, is referred to as conformorality (Lisciandra et al., 2013). This concept expresses the tendency of groups and communities to acritically rely on consensus viewpoints, judgements and values. Even in academic debates, it is increasingly common to be accused of being 'naive', 'insensitive' or 'part of the problem' if one demonstrates scepticism towards certain ideas or issues.

Conformorality raises particular concerns in science as it can severely compromise and hinder the development of constructive perspectives. While one can interpret conformorality as useful, even if only for purely functional reasons (such as not reinventing the wheel), it is crucial to recognise that an excess of conformorality can reduce fair confrontation and obstruct innovative ideas and solutions. Planning theory, urban studies and human geography are not exempt from this risk, and debates on circular economy, commons, commodification, densification, touristification, segregation, gentrification, digitalisation, informality, inequality, participation, neoliberalism, post-colonialism, peripheries-peripherality, post-growth, privatisation, sustainability, social justice and the just city—to name only a few—are all susceptible to conformorality.

In this context, the conference welcomes contributions that critically discuss conformorality in urban studies and invites scholars to investigate this issue from their own perspectives and experiences.
• To what extent does conformorality affect your research?
• Why does the community align on certain values?
• To what extent is conformorality a problem (or an opportunity)?
• What other ideas/views does conformorality hinder? How can we overcome it?

Link: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdAm9PCFkVZJsdWT5StVYD4U1FUyVsP2Q4IwYzEcSS-L-JxAg/viewform

Deadline for abstract submissions

Authors are invited to submit an abstract of a maximum of 250 words by 4 June 2023 using a Google Form. Authors will be notified of decisions on their abstracts by the end of June 2023.

Themed special issue 

Authors of certain selected abstracts will be offered the chance to contribute to a themed special issue of a peer-reviewed journal. The organisers will provide further information at that time.

Venue 

ILS – Research Institute for Regional and Urban Development (Dortmund)

Contacts 

Stefano Cozzolino and Anita De Franco

Inspirational references

Alshaalan, H., & Gummerum, M. (2022). Conformity on moral, social conventional and decency issues in the United Kingdom and Kuwait. International Journal of Psychology, 57(2), 261–270.
Chituc, V., & Sinnott-Armstrong, W. (2020). Moral conformity and its philosophical lessons. Philosophical Psychology, 33(2), 262–282.
Cialdini, R. B., & Goldstein, N. J. (2004). Social influence: Compliance and conformity. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 591–621.
Farrow, K., Grolleau, G., & Ibanez, L. (2017). Social norms and pro-environmental behavior: A review of the evidence. Ecological Economics, 140, 1–13.
Kelly, D. (2011). Yuck! The nature and moral significance of disgust. Cambridge (MA): The MIT Press.
Kelly, M., Ngo, L., Chituc, V., Huettel, S., & Sinnott-Armstrong, W. (2017). Moral conformity in online interactions: Rational justifications increase influence of peer opinions on moral judgments. Social Influence, 12(2–3), 57–68.
Kirchherr, J. (2022). Bullshit in the sustainability and transitions literature: A provocation. Circular Economy and Sustainability, 1–6.
Lisciandra, C., Postma-Nilsenová, M., & Colombo, M. (2013). Conformorality. A study on group conditioning of normative judgment. Review of Philosophy and Psychology, 4, 751–764.
Pluckrose, H., & Lindsay, J.A. (2020). Cynical theories. Pitchstone Publishing.
Roberts, S. O., Ho, A. K., & Gelman, S. A. (2019). The role of group norms in evaluating uncommon and negative behaviors. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 148(2), 374–387.
Roughley, N. (2018). From shared intentionality to moral obligation? Some worries. Philosophical Psychology, 31(5), 736–754.
Roughley, N., & Bayertz, K. (Eds.) (2019). The normative animal? On the anthropological significance of social, moral, and linguistic norms. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Schmidt, T. (2016). Accounting for moral conflicts. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 19, 9–19.
Szigeti, A. (2015). Sentimentalism and moral dilemmas. Dialectica, 69(1), 1–22.
Turiel, E. (2002). The culture of morality: Social development, context, and conflict. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Details

Parent Category: THEMATIC GROUPS

Category: Ethics, Values and Planning

Published: 03 March 2023

Annual conference of TG on Ethics, Values & Planning

Breaking through ‘conformorality’ in urban and regional studies (14 & 15 September 2023, Dortmund)

The conference takes its inspiration from The Grievance Studies Affair (2017/2018), a controversial experiment in which three researchers, using pseudonyms, published bizarre articles without scientific evidence but conforming to conventional, broadly accepted moral views. The team demonstrated that it is easier to get published in peer-reviewed scientific journals if one’s articles adhere to (and reinforce) certain mainstream viewpoints. The project’s findings exemplify what, in the literature, is referred to as conformorality (Lisciandra et al., 2013). This concept expresses the tendency of groups and communities to acritically rely on consensus viewpoints, judgements and values. Even in academic debates, it is increasingly common to be accused of being 'naive', 'insensitive' or 'part of the problem' if one demonstrates scepticism towards certain ideas or issues.

Conformorality raises particular concerns in science as it can severely compromise and hinder the development of constructive perspectives. While one can interpret conformorality as useful, even if only for purely functional reasons (such as not reinventing the wheel), it is crucial to recognise that an excess of conformorality can reduce fair confrontation and obstruct innovative ideas and solutions. Planning theory, urban studies and human geography are not exempt from this risk, and debates on circular economy, commons, commodification, densification, touristification, segregation, gentrification, digitalisation, informality, inequality, participation, neoliberalism, post-colonialism, peripheries-peripherality, post-growth, privatisation, sustainability, social justice and the just city—to name only a few—are all susceptible to conformorality.

In this context, the conference welcomes contributions that critically discuss conformorality in urban studies and invites scholars to investigate this issue from their own perspectives and experiences.
• To what extent does conformorality affect your research?
• Why does the community align on certain values?
• To what extent is conformorality a problem (or an opportunity)?
• What other ideas/views does conformorality hinder? How can we overcome it?

Link: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdAm9PCFkVZJsdWT5StVYD4U1FUyVsP2Q4IwYzEcSS-L-JxAg/viewform

Deadline for abstract submissions

Authors are invited to submit an abstract of a maximum of 250 words by 4 June 2023 using a Google Form. Authors will be notified of decisions on their abstracts by the end of June 2023.

Themed special issue 

Authors of certain selected abstracts will be offered the chance to contribute to a themed special issue of a peer-reviewed journal. The organisers will provide further information at that time.

Venue 

ILS – Research Institute for Regional and Urban Development (Dortmund)

Contacts 

Stefano Cozzolino and Anita De Franco

Inspirational references

Alshaalan, H., & Gummerum, M. (2022). Conformity on moral, social conventional and decency issues in the United Kingdom and Kuwait. International Journal of Psychology, 57(2), 261–270.
Chituc, V., & Sinnott-Armstrong, W. (2020). Moral conformity and its philosophical lessons. Philosophical Psychology, 33(2), 262–282.
Cialdini, R. B., & Goldstein, N. J. (2004). Social influence: Compliance and conformity. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 591–621.
Farrow, K., Grolleau, G., & Ibanez, L. (2017). Social norms and pro-environmental behavior: A review of the evidence. Ecological Economics, 140, 1–13.
Kelly, D. (2011). Yuck! The nature and moral significance of disgust. Cambridge (MA): The MIT Press.
Kelly, M., Ngo, L., Chituc, V., Huettel, S., & Sinnott-Armstrong, W. (2017). Moral conformity in online interactions: Rational justifications increase influence of peer opinions on moral judgments. Social Influence, 12(2–3), 57–68.
Kirchherr, J. (2022). Bullshit in the sustainability and transitions literature: A provocation. Circular Economy and Sustainability, 1–6.
Lisciandra, C., Postma-Nilsenová, M., & Colombo, M. (2013). Conformorality. A study on group conditioning of normative judgment. Review of Philosophy and Psychology, 4, 751–764.
Pluckrose, H., & Lindsay, J.A. (2020). Cynical theories. Pitchstone Publishing.
Roberts, S. O., Ho, A. K., & Gelman, S. A. (2019). The role of group norms in evaluating uncommon and negative behaviors. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 148(2), 374–387.
Roughley, N. (2018). From shared intentionality to moral obligation? Some worries. Philosophical Psychology, 31(5), 736–754.
Roughley, N., & Bayertz, K. (Eds.) (2019). The normative animal? On the anthropological significance of social, moral, and linguistic norms. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Schmidt, T. (2016). Accounting for moral conflicts. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 19, 9–19.
Szigeti, A. (2015). Sentimentalism and moral dilemmas. Dialectica, 69(1), 1–22.
Turiel, E. (2002). The culture of morality: Social development, context, and conflict. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Details

Parent Category: THEMATIC GROUPS

Category: Planning Theories

Published: 28 February 2023

Meike Levin-Keitel (TU Dortmund University), Franziska Sielker (TU Wien/University of Cambridge), and Ben Davy (TU Dortmund University/University of Johannesburg), as the co-coordinators of the AESOP Thematic Group Planning Theories (plural), invite you to the online conference BEG, STEAL, OR BORROW.

Program here.

For the Zoom link, please register not later than 14 March at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Details

Parent Category: THEMATIC GROUPS

Category: Ethics, Values and Planning

Published: 20 February 2023

Curious to explore and discuss the interrelation between urban design and justice?

The AESOP TG on Ethics, Values and Planning invites you to join a vivid (online) debate on Tuesday, March 28, 2023, from 5 to 6 pm (CET) with Kian Goh, Anastasia Loukaitou-Sideris and Vinit Mukhija, editors of the book “Just Urban Design: The Struggle for a Public City” (2022, MIT Press, open access).

The discussion will start with a general input by the three editors and will focus, in particular, on the introduction and conclusion of the book. After that, two expert discussants -- Talia Margalit (Tel Aviv University) and Stefano Moroni (Politecnico di Milano) -- will provide further reflections and initiate an open debate.  

 Please, consider the following in preparation for the event:

• Prepare yourself by reading the two chapters in advance (the book is open-access);
• Register for the event at the following link [https://forms.gle/pyZSNMZT4T32hb5k6] (you will receive a zoom-link before the event);
• Participants can send us a question, idea, or comment to be raised during the event via e-mail by March 26 at the latest. 

To secure active participation and exchange among participants, although online, the event will have a limited capacity. So, please, register on time [link here: https://forms.gle/pyZSNMZT4T32hb5k6]