Perceived vocal morbidity in a problem asthma clinic

<p>Aims: Asthma treatment has the potential to affect patients' voices. We undertook detailed characterisation of voice morbidity in patients attending a problem asthma clinic, and we determined how patients' perceptions related to objective assessment by an experienced observer.</p> <p>Methods: Forty-three patients took part in the study. Subjects completed the self-administered voice symptom score (VoiSS) questionnaire and underwent digital voice recording. These voice recordings were scored using the grade–roughness–breathiness–asthenicity–strain system (GRBAS). Laryngoscopy was also performed.</p> <p>Results: The median VoiSS was 26 (range three to 83). VoiSS were significantly lower in the 17 patients with normal laryngeal structure and function (range four to 46; median 22), compared with the 26 patients with functional or structural laryngeal abnormality (range three to 83; median 33) (95 per cent confidence intervals for difference 0.0–21.0; p = 0.044). The overall grade score for the GRBAS scale did not differ between these two groups, and only 13 patients had a GRBAS score of one or more, recognised as indicating a voice problem. There were positive correlations between related GRBAS score and voice symptom score subscales. Although voice symptom scores were significantly more abnormal in patients with structural and functional abnormalities, this score performed only moderately well as a predictive tool (sensitivity 54 per cent; specificity 71 per cent). Nevertheless, the voice symptom score performed as well as the more labour-intensive GRBAS score (sensitivity 57 per cent; specificity 60 per cent). Patients' inhaled corticosteroid dose (median dose 1000 µg beclomethasone dipropionate or equivalent) had a statistically significant relationship with their overall grade score for the GRBAS scale (r = 0.56; p < 0.001), but not with their VoiSS. Only one patient had evidence of laryngeal candidiasis, and only two had any evidence of abnormality suggesting steroid-induced myopathy.</p> <p>Conclusions: Vocal morbidity is common in patients with asthma, and should not be immediately attributed to steroid-related candidiasis. The VoiSS merits further, prospective validation as a screening tool for ENT and/or speech and language therapy referral in patients with asthma.</p&gt

The ergonomics of command and control

Since its inception, just after the Second World War, ergonomics research has paid special attention to the issues surrounding human control of systems. Command and Control environments continue to represent a challenging domain for Ergonomics research. We take a broad view of Command and Control research, to include C2 (Command and Control), C3 (Command, Control and Communication), and C4 (Command, Control, Communication and Computers) as well as human supervisory control paradigms. This special issue of ERGONOMICS aims to present state-of-the-art research into models of team performance, evaluation of novel interaction technologies, case studies, methodologies and theoretical review papers. We are pleased to present papers that detail research on these topics in domains as diverse as the emergency services (e.g., police, fire, and ambulance), civilian applications (e.g., air traffic control, rail networks, and nuclear power) and military applications (e.g., land, sea and air) of command and control. While the domains of application are very diverse, many of the challenges they face share interesting similarities

Error by design: Methods for predicting device usability

This paper introduces the idea of predicting ‘designer error’ by evaluating devices using Human Error Identification (HEI) techniques. This is demonstrated using Systematic Human Error Reduction and Prediction Approach (SHERPA) and Task Analysis For Error Identification (TAFEI) to evaluate a vending machine. Appraisal criteria which rely upon user opinion, face validity and utilisation are questioned. Instead a quantitative approach, based upon signal detection theory, is recommended. The performance of people using SHERPA and TAFEI are compared with heuristic judgement and each other. The results of these studies show that both SHERPA and TAFEI are better at predicting errors than the heuristic technique. The performance of SHERPA and TAFEI are comparable, giving some confidence in the use of these approaches. It is suggested that using HEI techniques as part of the design and evaluation process could help to make devices easier to use

Neuroeconomics: A Critique of ‘Neuroeconomics: A Critical Reconsideration’

Some economists believe that neuroeconomists threatens the theory of economics. Glenn Harrison’s paper “Neuroeconomics: A Critical Reconsideration” (2008) provides some support for this view, though some of the points he makes are somewhat disguised. The field of neuroeconomics is barely into its teenage years; and it is trying to do what? Criticize and redesign the field of economics developed over hundreds of years? But that is not what neuroeconomics is trying to do, in spite of all the efforts of some economists trying to place it into that shoebox (see the argument in great detail in Andrew Caplin, Andrew Schotter 2008). Neuroeconomics is a Mendelian-Economics of sort; it is a science that is able to generate data by fixing the environment to some degree, varying a single independent variable for its affects, and is able to see each individual’s choices from initiation of the decision-making process to its outcome. Mainstream (standard) economics, on the other hand, looks at the average of the outcomes of many individuals and proposes how people chose those outcomes, retroactively. The two fields, neuroeconomics and standard economics, are evaluating two sides of the same coin: one with and the other without ceteris paribus; they are not in conflict with one another.Neuroeconomics, Standard Economics, Ceteris Paribus, Hormones

Neuroeconomics: A Critique of 'Neuroeconomics: A Critical Reconsideration'

Some economists believe that the work of neuroeconomists threatens the theory of economics. Glenn Harrison’s paper “Neuroeconomics: A Critical Reconsideration” attempts to set the score, though the points he makes are hidden behind the fumes of his anger (Glenn W. Harrison 2008). The field of neuroeconomics is barely into its teenage years; and it is trying to do what? Redesign the field of economics developed over a hundred years? No, that is not what neuroeconomics is trying to do, in spite of all the efforts of some economists trying to place it into that shoebox. Neuroeconomics is a Mendelian-Economics of sort; it is a science that is able to generate data by fixing the environment to some degree and looking to see each individual’s choices from the initiation of the decision-making process to its outcome. Standard economics (SE), on the other hand, looks at the average of the outputs of many individuals and proposes how the human chose those outcomes. The two fields, neuroeconomics and SE, are evaluating two sides of the same coin; one with and the other without ceteris paribus; they are not necessarily in conflict with one another.A debate over the field of Neuroeconomics

Neural Substrates of Decision-Making in Economic Games

In economic experiments decisions often differ from game-theoretic predictions. Why are people generous in one-shot ultimatum games with strangers? Is there a benefit to generosity toward strangers? Research on the neural substrates of decisions suggests that some choices are hormone-dependent. By artificially stimulating subjects with neuroactive hormones, we can identify which hormones and brain regions participate in decisionmaking, to what degree and in what direction. Can a hormone make a person generous while another stingy? In this paper, two laboratory experiments are described using the hormones oxytocin (OT) and arginine vasopressin (AVP). Concentrations of these hormones in the brain continuously change in response to external stimuli. OT enhances trust (Michael Kosfeld et al. 2005b), reduce fear from strangers (C. Sue Carter 1998), and has anti-anxiety effects (Kerstin Uvnäs-Moberg, Maria Peterson 2005). AVP enhances attachment and bonding with kin in monogamous male mammals (Jennifer N. Ferguson et al. 2002) and increases reactive aggression (C. Sue Carter 2007). Dysfunctions of OT and/or AVP reception have been associated with autism (Miranda M. Lim et al. 2005). In Chapter One I review past experiments with the ultimatum (UG) and dictator (DG) games and visit some of the major results in the literature. In Chapter Two I present the results of my laboratory experiment where I examine why people are generous in one-shot economic games with strangers. I hypothesize that oxytocin would enhance generosity in the UG. Players in the OT group were much more generous than those in the placebo—OT offers in the UG were 80% higher than offers on placebo. Enhanced generosity was not due to altruism as there was no effect on DG offers. This implies that other-regarding preferences are at play in the amount of money sent but only in a reciprocal context. The third chapter presents an experiment on punishment. I hypothesized that AVP would increase rejections and stinginess in the UG and TG. Results show that AVP affects rejections and stinginess in small groups but not in large ones. Chapter Four contains the summary of future research suggestions.Oxytocin; Vasopressin; ultimatum game; dictator game; trust game; generosity; altruism

Heated tobacco products: another tobacco industry global strategy to slow progress in tobacco control.

There has been a global decline in tobacco consumption that, if continued, will negatively impact the tobacco industry's profits. This decline led the industry to invent and market new products, including heated tobacco products (HTP). HTP are an extension of the industry's strategies to undermine government's tobacco regulatory efforts as they are being promoted as part of the solution for the tobacco epidemic. Under the moniker of 'harm reduction', the tobacco companies are attempting to rehabilitate their reputation so they can more effectively influence governments to roll back existing tobacco control policies or create exemptions for their HTP. Rolling back tobacco control policies will make it easier for the companies to renormalise tobacco use to increase social acceptability for all their products. When regulations are absent or when loopholes exist in classifying HTP as a tobacco product (thus subject to all tobacco control regulations), the industry's marketing of HTP is making these products more visible to the public and more accessible. Governments need to ensure that HTP are regulated as tobacco products or drugs and reject partnerships with the tobacco companies to promote 'harm reduction'. The tobacco companies remain the vector of the tobacco-caused epidemic and cannot be part of the global tobacco control solution

Engineering psychology: Contribution to system safety

There has been a growing interest in the area of engineering psychology. This article considers some of the major accidents which have occurred in recent years, and the contribution which engineering psychology makes to designing systems and enhancing safety. Accidents are usually multi-causal, and the resident pathogens in the design and operation of human-machine systems can lead to devastating consequences not only for the workers themselves but also for people in the surrounding communities. Specifically, in each of the accidents discussed, operators were unaware of the seriousness of the system malfunctions because warning displays were poorly designed or located, and operators had not been sufficiently trained in dealing with these emergency situations. Since the 1940s machines and equipment have become more complex in nearly every industry. This, coupled with the continuing need to produce effective and safe systems, has resulted in psychology professionals being called to assist in designing even more efficient operating systems. In earlier times, a worker who made a mistake might spoil a piece of work or waste some time. Today, however, a worker's erroneous action can lead to dire consequences

Ubiquitous computing: Anytime, anyplace, anywhere?

Computers are ubiquitous, in terms that they are everywhere, but does this mean the same as ubiquitous computing? Views are divided. The convergent device (one-does-all) view posits the computer as a tool through which anything, and indeed everything, can be done (Licklider & Taylor, 1968). The divergent device (many-do-all) view, by contrast, offers a world where microprocessors are embedded in everything and communicating with one another (Weiser, 1991). This debate is implicitly present in this issue, with examples of the convergent device in Crook & Barrowcliff's paper and in Gay et al's paper, and examples of the divergent devices in Thomas & Gellersen's paper and Baber's paper. I suspect both streams of technology are likely to co-exist

Environment for the People

Environment for the People, a joint publication of PERI and the Centre for Science and the Environment (CSE) in India, documents innovative strategies used by environmental activists around the world to build natural assets. In diverse landscapes, from Bangladesh's riverine delta to Somalia's arid uplands, ommunities are investing in ecological restoration. In 'extractive reserves' in the Amazon rainforest, the defense of sustainable livelihoods goes hand-in-hand with defense of bio-diversity. In the Peruvian Andes, indigenous communities are fighting to protect their lands and water from the ravages of the mining industry. And in cities around the world, from Los Angeles to New Delhi, communities are mobilizing to defend the right to clean air. These and other inspiring cases profiled in Environment for the People illustrate that humankind does not face an inexorable 'tradeoff' between protecting the natural environment and improving economic well-being. On the contrary, struggles for environmental protection and sustainable livelihoods are bound together