Conscious and Unconscious Thought in Risky Choice: Testing the Capacity Principle and the Appropriate Weighting Principle of Unconscious Thought Theory

Daily we make decisions ranging from the mundane to the seemingly pivotal that shape our lives. Assuming rationality, all relevant information about one’s options should be thoroughly examined in order to make the best choice. However, some findings suggest that under specific circumstances thinking too much has disadvantageous effects on decision quality and that it might be best to let the unconscious do the busy work. In three studies we test the capacity assumption and the appropriate weighting principle of Unconscious Thought Theory using a classic risky choice paradigm and including a “deliberation with information” condition. Although we replicate an advantage for unconscious thought (UT) over “deliberation without information,” we find that “deliberation with information” equals or outperforms UT in risky choices. These results speak against the generality of the assumption that UT has a higher capacity for information integration and show that this capacity assumption does not hold in all domains. Furthermore, we show that “deliberate thought with information” leads to more differentiated knowledge compared to UT which speaks against the generality of the appropriate weighting assumption

Special Issue of the Journal of Behavioral Decision Making on “Applications and Innovations of Eye‐Movement Research in Judgment and Decision Making”

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/100158/1/bdm1798.pd

The endowment effect and beliefs about the market

The endowment effect occurs when people assign a higher value to an item they own than to the same item when they do not own it, and this effect is often taken to reflect an ownership-induced change in the intrinsic value people assign to the object. However recent evidence shows that valuations made by buyers and sellers are influenced by market prices provided for the individual products, suggesting a role for beliefs about the markets. Here we elicit individuals’ beliefs about whole distributions of market prices, enabling us to quantify whether or not a given transaction constitutes a “good deal” and to demonstrate how an endowment effect may reflect such considerations. In a meta-analysis and three laboratory experiments, we show for the first time that ownership has no effect on beliefs about either: (a) the quality of the item or (b) the appropriate market price for the item. Instead, we show that sellers demand a price for the item that matches their beliefs about the item’s relative quality and the distribution of market prices in the market. Buyers, in contrast, offer less than what they believe the appropriate market price is. Thus, we argue that the endowment effect may largely reflect “adaptively rational” behavior on the part of both buyers and sellers (given their beliefs about relevant markets) rather than any ownership-induced bias or change in intrinsic preferences

Childhood vision impairment and blindness in West Africa: public health measures and implications for systemic health

Childhood blindness is an issue of global health impact, affecting approximately 2 million children worldwide. Vision 2020 and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals previously identified childhood blindness as a key issue in the twentieth century, and while public health measures are underway, the precise etiologies and management require ongoing investigation and care, particularly within resource-limited settings such as sub-Saharan Africa. We systematically reviewed the literature on childhood blindness in West Africa to identify the anatomic classification and etiologies, particularly those causes of childhood blindness with systemic health implications. Treatable causes included cataract, refractive error, and corneal disease. Systemic etiologies identified included measles, rubella, vitamin A deficiency, and Ebola virus disease. While prior public health measures including vitamin A supplementation and vaccination programs have been deployed in most countries with reported data, multiple studies reported preventable or reversible etiologies of blindness and vision impairment. Ongoing research is necessary to standardize reporting for anatomies and/or etiologies of childhood blindness to determine the necessity of further development and implementation of public health measures that would ameliorate childhood blindness and vision impairment

Exponential growth, high prevalence of SARS-CoV-2, and vaccine effectiveness associated with the Delta variant

SARS-CoV-2 infections were rising during early summer 2021 in many countries associated with the Delta variant. We assessed RT-PCR swab-positivity in the REal-time Assessment of Community Transmission-1 (REACT-1) study in England. We observed sustained exponential growth with average doubling time (June-July 2021) of 25 days driven by complete replacement of Alpha variant by Delta, and by high prevalence at younger less-vaccinated ages. Unvaccinated people were three times more likely than double-vaccinated people to test positive. However, after adjusting for age and other variables, vaccine effectiveness for double-vaccinated people was estimated at between ~50% and ~60% during this period in England. Increased social mixing in the presence of Delta had the potential to generate sustained growth in infections, even at high levels of vaccination

Convalescent plasma in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised controlled, open-label, platform trial

SummaryBackground Azithromycin has been proposed as a treatment for COVID-19 on the basis of its immunomodulatoryactions. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of azithromycin in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19.Methods In this randomised, controlled, open-label, adaptive platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19Therapy [RECOVERY]), several possible treatments were compared with usual care in patients admitted to hospitalwith COVID-19 in the UK. The trial is underway at 176 hospitals in the UK. Eligible and consenting patients wererandomly allocated to either usual standard of care alone or usual standard of care plus azithromycin 500 mg once perday by mouth or intravenously for 10 days or until discharge (or allocation to one of the other RECOVERY treatmentgroups). Patients were assigned via web-based simple (unstratified) randomisation with allocation concealment andwere twice as likely to be randomly assigned to usual care than to any of the active treatment groups. Participants andlocal study staff were not masked to the allocated treatment, but all others involved in the trial were masked to theoutcome data during the trial. The primary outcome was 28-day all-cause mortality, assessed in the intention-to-treatpopulation. The trial is registered with ISRCTN, 50189673, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04381936.Findings Between April 7 and Nov 27, 2020, of 16 442 patients enrolled in the RECOVERY trial, 9433 (57%) wereeligible and 7763 were included in the assessment of azithromycin. The mean age of these study participants was65·3 years (SD 15·7) and approximately a third were women (2944 [38%] of 7763). 2582 patients were randomlyallocated to receive azithromycin and 5181 patients were randomly allocated to usual care alone. Overall,561 (22%) patients allocated to azithromycin and 1162 (22%) patients allocated to usual care died within 28 days(rate ratio 0·97, 95% CI 0·87–1·07; p=0·50). No significant difference was seen in duration of hospital stay (median10 days [IQR 5 to >28] vs 11 days [5 to >28]) or the proportion of patients discharged from hospital alive within 28 days(rate ratio 1·04, 95% CI 0·98–1·10; p=0·19). Among those not on invasive mechanical ventilation at baseline, nosignificant difference was seen in the proportion meeting the composite endpoint of invasive mechanical ventilationor death (risk ratio 0·95, 95% CI 0·87–1·03; p=0·24).Interpretation In patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19, azithromycin did not improve survival or otherprespecified clinical outcomes. Azithromycin use in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 should be restrictedto patients in whom there is a clear antimicrobial indication

Anonymized location data reveals trends in legal Cannabis use in communities with increased mental health risks at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to increases in felt negative affect for many. This is concerning as individuals at increased risk for mental health issues are often more likely to use substances to cope with stressors. Objectives: The aim of the current study is to examine whether communities reporting an increased risk for developing mental health issues showed differential patterns of legal cannabis use as the pandemic began. A secondary goal is to examine the feasibility of using anonymized location data to uncover community consumption patterns of potential concern. Methods: Anonymized location data from approximately 10% of devices in the United States provided a count of the number of visitors to 3,335 cannabis retail locations (medical and recreational) each day from December 1st 2019 through April 2020. Visitor counts were merged with the average number of mentally unhealthy days (aMUDs) reported in the Federal Information Processing Standard (FIPS) county the retailer was located along with FIPS county population and poverty rate estimates. A Poisson spline regression predicting visitors by day, aMUDs, as well as their interaction was performed, entering population and poverty rate as covariates. Results: As the pandemic began communities reporting a greater aMUDs showed greater visitation to cannabis retailers. Conclusions: These results suggest that the COVID-19 pandemic may have led to increased legal cannabis use in at risk communities. They also highlight the value anonymized location data can provide policymakers and practitioners in uncovering community level trends as they confront an increasingly uncertain landscape

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Unhealthy Eating in Populations with Obesity

Objective: This study aimed to examine the impact of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic on patronage to unhealthy eating establishments in populations with obesity. Methods: Anonymized movement data accounting for roughly 10% of devices in the United States at 138,989 unhealthy eating locations from December 1, 2019, through April 2020 and the percentage of adults with obesity, the poverty rate, and the food environment index in 65% of United States counties were collected and merged. A cluster corrected Poisson spline regression was performed predicting patronage by day, the percentage of adults with obesity in the establishment’s county, the county’s poverty rate, and its food environment index, as well as their interactions. Results: Patronage to unhealthy eating establishments was higher where there was a higher percentage of the adult population with obesity. A similar pattern was observed for counties with a lower food environment index. These disparities appear to have increased as the COVID-19 pandemic spread. Conclusions: These results suggest unhealthy eating patterns during the COVID-19 pandemic are higher in already at-risk populations. Policy makers can use these findings to motivate interventions and programs aimed at increasing healthy food intake in at-risk communities during crises