Le retentissement psychologique d’événements sources de responsabilité, quels qu’ils soient – acte de terrorisme, perte d’un être cher, harcèlement moral… – est spécifique du fait de ses caractères protéiforme et invisible. Tout d’abord, le premier d’entre eux tient au fait qu’en matière psychologique tant les atteintes que les souffrances en résultant sont diverses. Ainsi, d’un point de vue lésionnel, certains événements vont s’avérer plus traumatisants que d’autres, principalement ceux au cours desquels le sujet a été confronté à sa propre mort. Concernant la souffrance, un sujet peut tout aussi bien souffrir émotionnellement d’une altération de sa propre intégrité – par exemple physique avec le diagnostic d’une pathologie grave – que d’un tort affectant celle d’un proche (e.g. décès, handicap). Un retentissement qualifié d’invisible ensuite, puisqu’il apparaît bien plus aisé d’identifier une atteinte à l’intégrité physique qu’une atteinte à l’intégrité psychique. De plus, certaines atteintes psychologiques sont totalement insaisissables en raison de leur caractère éminemment diffus. L’objet de cette démonstration est donc de savoir comment le droit de la responsabilité civile va appréhender la victime de ce retentissement psychologique. Sa prise en charge ne pourra être que particulière du fait de l’interaction inévitable entre les sphères juridique et psychologique.Afin de le découvrir sera proposée, dans un premier temps, une conceptualisation de la victime psychologique se fondant sur la réalité psychopathologique. Deux grandes distinctions nourrissent cette réflexion. L’une est de nature juridique ; il s’agit de la distinction du dommage et du préjudice. L’autre est d’origine psychopathologique ; elle oppose le choc émotionnel au traumatisme psychique. Leur entrecroisement permettra d’élaborer différents cas de manifestation de la souffrance psychologique et de dessiner les contours de la qualité de victime. Dans un second temps, au titre de l’indemnisation de la victime psychologique, tant l’appréciation que l’évaluation de ses préjudices seront examinées. Les répercussions du traumatisme psychique voire du choc émotionnel vont parfois être si importantes que l’indemnisation ne pourra se cantonner à la seule souffrance éprouvée. Des conséquences de nature différente, par exemple patrimoniales, devront être prises en considération. À cette fin, une typologie des préjudices de la victime sous analyse mérite d’être mise en place. Des règles d’indemnisation distinctes seront érigées en fonction du préjudice subi. Un préjudice présumé, notamment à partir d’un dommage, ne pourra logiquement être compensé de la même façon que des préjudices non présumables, c’est-à-dire soumis à expertise. En somme, le système d’indemnisation à instaurer se devra d’être en phase avec le système de révélation de la souffrance qui aura été précédemment établi.Ainsi, cette étude se propose de construire un réel statut fondateur de la victime psychologique. Une fois cette notion cardinale intégralement conceptualisée, un régime d’indemnisation s’en inférant sera rationnellement avancé. / The psychological impact of the events, which are the source of responsibility, be they acts of terrorism, loss of a loved one, psychological harassment, is specific to characteristics both protean and invisible. The first among them is due to the fact that in psychological matter injuries and the resulting suffering are both varied. As such, from the injury point of view, certain events will prove to be more traumatizing than others. Principally those during which the subject has been faced with his own death. Concerning suffering, a subject can as well emotionally suffer a change in his own integrity – for example the physical one with a diagnosis of a serious illness – that of a sort damage which affects that of a loved one (e.g. death or handicap). Then, the impact is considered invisible. It appears much more simple indeed, to identify harm to physical integrity as a harm to psychic integrity. More so, certain psychological harms are totally imperceptible by reason of their eminently diffuse characteristic. The object of this demonstration is therefore to know how civil liability law will comprehend the victim of such a psychological impact. Its comprehension will be particular given the inevitable interaction between the judicial and psychological spheres.In order to better understand this, we will first propose a conceptualization of the psychological victim that blends into psychopathological reality. Two major distinctions feed this thought. One is legal nature, which relates to the distinction between prejudice and harm. The other is psychopathological in nature which opposes emotional shock and psychic trauma. Their intertwining allows us to elaborate different cases of manifestation of psychological suffering and define the contours of the qualities of the victim. Secondly, regarding compensation for a psychological victim, both the appreciation and the evaluation of these prejudices will be examined. The repercussions of psychic trauma, or even emotional shock can sometimes be so grave that compensation cannot restrict itself only to the experienced suffering. Consequences of different natures, for example patrimonial ones, must be taken into consideration. To this end, a division of the prejudices of the psychological victim should be put in place. Distinct rules of compensation will be established based on the prejudice endured. A prejudice presumed, originating notably from a harm, cannot logically be compensated in the same fashion as non-presumable prejudices that require a forensic assessment. In short, the system of compensation must be in phase with the system of disclosure of suffering that has been previously established. As a result, this study proposes to construct a true founding status of a psychological victim. Once this principal notion has been completely conceptualized, we can use it to create a rational compensation scheme.

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-26T20:24:21Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Rodrigo Giacomeli Nunes Massud.pdf: 1110890 bytes, checksum: e4b492fcf06926736dbb3cffae5f2bbf (MD5) Previous issue date: 2016-03-11 / Two major factors should be highlighted for a thematic overview of this study: (i) the revolution of language studies (linguistic turn) and its great repercussion on the interpretation and establishment of a legal reality, having its peak with the proposal for cognitive isolation, the so called abyss of knowledge; and (ii) the appreciation of legal precedents in shaping the legal-tax relations and in the construction of the normative senses, with the projection for the legitimate future expectations, rationalizing the jurisdictional rendering through its programmed mechanization and thereby distancing from the factual particularities of concrete cases. A combination of the arising phenomena of these categorical axes, a legal-philosophical and dogmatic integration in the study of res judicata and rescission in tax matters by alteration of precedent cases was accomplished, in light of the Brazilian Civil Procedure Code of 2015, having its methodological counterpoint on the guidance disseminated by the Legal Opinion PGFN nª 492/2011 / Dois grandes fatores se destacam numa síntese temática do trabalho: (i) a revolução dos estudos da linguagem (linguistic turn) e sua grande repercussão em matéria de interpretação e constituição da realidade jurídica, com ápice na proposta de isolamento cognitivo do ser, o chamado abismo do conhecimento; e (ii) a valorização dos precedentes na conformação das relações jurídico-tributárias e na construção dos sentidos normativos, com a projeção para as legítimas expectativas futuras, racionalizando-se a prestação jurisdicional por meio de sua mecanização programada e, com isso, distanciando-se das particularidades fáticas dos casos em concreto. Aliando os fenômenos decorrentes destes eixos categóricos, procuramos realizar uma integração jurídico-filosófica e dogmática no estudo da coisa julgada e da rescisória em matéria tributária por alteração de jurisprudência, à luz do Código de Processo Civil de 2015, tendo como contraponto metodológico as orientações veiculadas e difundidas pelo Parecer PGFN n.º 492/2011

Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) / Women who fail to confront sexism can experience negative intrapersonal consequences, such as greater negative self-directed affect (negself) and greater obsessive thoughts, particularly if they are highly committed to challenging sexism. Female undergraduates (N = 392) were sampled to investigate whether failing to confront past sexism influences future task performance and whether any effects on performance occur through the depletion of cognitive resources. Participants were randomly assigned to recall either confronting or failing to confront past sexism, then completed measures of affect, obsessive thoughts, working memory, and performance. Women who recalled failing to confront were expected to have greater negself and obsessive thoughts related to the situation and lower working memory and performance, and desire to respond to the situation was expected to moderate these effects. As predicted, compared with women who recalled confronting, women who recalled failing to confront reported greater negself. Contrary to predictions, there was no significant effect of confrontation condition on obsessive thoughts, working memory, or performance. However, condition interacted with desire to confront, such that the more women who recalled failing to confront wanted to respond to the situation, the more negself they reported and the lower their working memory. In addition, for women who recalled confronting, greater desire to respond was associated with higher performance, while desire to respond was unrelated to performance for women who recalled failing to confront. In contrast to predictions, neither obsessive thoughts nor working memory mediated the failure to confront-performance relationship, and there was no evidence of moderated mediation. In sum, although the cognitive variables of obsessive thoughts and working memory did not mediate the effect of failing to confront on performance, the results nevertheless demonstrate the importance of confronting sexism, particularly when one wants to do so, and have important implications for settings like the workplace where women may face discrimination and have to decide whether or not to confront.