Effects of a Multiple Schedule of Collective Reinforcement on Shaping the Cultivative Response Rate of Three-man Teams

The principle of reinforcement developed by experimenting with individual subjects has been extended in recent years for use with groups. In most of these studies some social interaction within the group is reinforced. For example, Azrin and Lindsley (1956) and Lindsley (1961) have manipulated imitation, cooperation, and competition between two subjects in an operant conditioning situation. Levin and Shapiro (1962) manipulated conversation between members of a group through appropriate reinforcement. Glaser and Klaus (1962) conditioned a team of two monitors and an observer to respond as a unit by reinforcing the group only when each member had made the proper response

Pandemic influenza: implications for occupational medicine

This article reviews the biological and occupational medicine literature related to H5N1 pandemic influenza and its impact on infection control, cost and business continuity in settings outside the health care community. The literature on H5N1 biology is reviewed including the treatment and infection control mechanisms as they pertain to occupational medicine. Planning activity for the potential arrival of pandemic avian influenza is growing rapidly. Much has been published on the molecular biology of H5N1 but there remains a paucity of literature on the occupational medicine impacts to organizations. This review summarizes some of the basic science surrounding H5N1 influenza and raises some key concerns in pandemic planning for the occupational medicine professional. Workplaces other than health care settings will be impacted greatly by an H5N1 pandemic and the occupational physician will play an essential role in corporate preparation, response, and business continuity strategies

What a person thinks upon learning he has chosen differently from others: Nice evidence for the persuasive-arguments explanation of choice shifts

Small shifts in choice occur even without discussion, when individuals merely know each other's preference. This appears to support an interpersonal comparison explanation of group induced shifts in choice and to refute explanations based on persuasive argumentation. The present study demonstrates the contrary, that such effects are consistent with the persuasive-arguments formulation and are obtained under particular conditions specified only by the latter theory, to wit: Knowledge of other's choices is assumed to lead a person to think of reasons (arguments) others might have had for their choices-reasons which ordinarily would not come to mind without this knowledge. Such reasoning functions in the same way as persuasive argumentation during group discussion; it causes the person to persuade himself that an alternative course of action now has greater merit than the one he initially preferred. To test this analysis, an experiment was performed in which subjects responded to choice-dilemma items under three different conditions: Following their own choice (I) they learned what several others had chosen and then wrote arguments in support of alternatives given in that same item; (II) they learned what several others had chosen and then wrote arguments in support of alternatives given in a different item; and (III) they received no information about others' choices but merely wrote arguments on that item. As predicted, shifts in choice occurred only if the person knew what others chose and had an opportunity to think about the latter (condition I); they did not occur if an opportunity to think of others' choices was denied (condition II), nor if knowledge of others' choices was withheld (condition III). Content analysis of the arguments subjects produced in conditions I and II completely supported the hypothesis, as did analyses of responses to postexperimental questionnaire which directly asked the subjects about their feelings and thoughts upon learning what others had chosen.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/21997/1/0000410.pd

Testing two classes of theories about group induced shifts in individual choice

One class of theories explains group induced shifts in individual choice in terms of interpersonal comparison process. By comparing himself with others a member finds out that his position is uncomfortably discrepant, e.g., he is overly cautious or overly risky. Knowledge of this discrepancy presumably is necessary and sufficient to induce him to change his initial choice. Another class of theories holds that merely knowing one is different from others is unimportant. Shifts in choice occur because during discussion a member is exposed to persuasive arguments which prior to discussion were not available to him. Two experiments were conducted, the results of which give considerable support to persuasive-argument theories and none to those based on interpersonal comparison: When a member did not know whether others were arguing for their own position or were forced to support a position contrary to the one they had originally chosen, and the former in fact was the case, typical shifts in choice were obtained. However, if a member had to argue for a position contrary to the one he had initially chosen (and thus he would not be able to muster highly persuasive arguments) typical shifts did not occur, even though another's initial choice could be accurately inferred.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/33923/1/0000190.pd

On V_ud determination from kaon decays

The pion beta decay pi^+ -> pi^0 e^+ nu proceeds through pure weak vector hadronic currents and, therefore, the theoretical prediction for it is more reliable than for the processes with axial-vector current contribution. For example, recently the pion beta decay has been used for V_ud determination. The main aim of this letter is to point that kaon beta decay K^0 -> K^+(pi^+ pi^0) e^- nu-bar analogously can be used for this purpose.Comment: 3 pages, no figures, one reference adde

Study of muons near shower cores at sea level using the E594 neutrino detector

The E594 neutrino detector has been used to study the lateral distribution of muons of energy 3 GeV near shower cores. The detector consists of a 340 ton fine grain calorimeter with 400,000 cells of flash chamber and dimensions of 3.7 m x 20 m x 3.7 m (height). The average density in the calorimeter is 1.4 gm/sq cm, and the average Z is 21. The detector was triggered by four 0.6 sq m scintillators placed immediately on the top of the calorimeter. The trigger required at least two of these four counters. The accompanying extensive air showers (EAS) was sampled by 14 scintillation counters located up to 15 m from the calorimeter. Several off line cuts have been applied to the data. Demanding five particles in at least two of the trigger detectors, a total of 20 particles in all of them together, and an arrival angle for the shower 450 deg reduced the data sample to 11053 events. Of these in 4869 cases, a computer algorithm found at least three muons in the calorimeter

Interpersonal comparison versus persuasive argumentation: A more direct test of alternative explanations for group-induced shifts in individual choice

One class of theories explains group induced shifts in individual choice in terms of interpersonal comparison process. By comparing himself with others a member finds out that his position is uncomfortably discrepant, e.g., he is overly "cautious" or overly "risky". Knowledge of this discrepancy presumably is necessary and sufficient to induce him to change his initial choice. Another class of theories holds that merely knowing one is different from others is unimportant. Shifts in choice occur because during discussion a member is exposed to persuasive arguments which prior to discussion were not available to him. Thus, if in a factorial design one independently varied (a) the number of others' choices available for comparison and (b) the number of arguments others presented in support of these choices, interpersonal comparison theories would predict the magnitude of the shift to be a function of (a) and not of (b), while theories of persuasive argumentation would predict the opposite. When such an experiment was performed the only reliable main effects were based on the number of arguments, (b), as predicted by persuasive arguments. In no instance did effects involving (a) approach significance.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/33886/1/0000151.pd

What do differences between own, admired, and attributed choices have to do with group induced shifts in choice

Two studies examined certain discrepancies which have been considered important evidence in support of interpersonal comparison (value-adherence) explanations of group induced shifts in choice. These are (a) the differences between a person's own choice and the choice he predicts others would make and (b) the difference between the former and the choice he admires. Findings from the first study indicate that own choices are more extreme than those a person predicts others would make because he is more certain and confident about the former than the latter, not because he wishes to appear to outdo others as interpersonal comparison theories of choice-shift effect would have it. The second study strongly suggests that extreme choices are admired not because they display maximal adherence to a social ideal but because they imply that the person's solution to a problem involving choice is well-founded, that he has persuasive reasons for the choice. On the whole the evidence bodes well for explanations of choice-shift effects based on persuasive argumentation and poorly for those relying on interpersonal comparison processes.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/22288/1/0000728.pd

Observation of Parity Violation in the Omega-minus -> Lambda + K-minus Decay

The alpha decay parameter in the process Omega-minus -> Lambda + K-minus has been measured from a sample of 4.50 million unpolarized Omega-minus decays recorded by the HyperCP (E871) experiment at Fermilab and found to be [1.78 +/- 0.19(stat) +/- 0.16(syst)]{\times}10^{-2}. This is the first unambiguous evidence for a nonzero alpha decay parameter, and hence parity violation, in the Omega-minus -> Lambda + K-minus decay.Comment: 10 pages, 7 figure

Linearization of donor DNA during plasmid transformation in Neisseria gonorrhoeae.

We examined the fate of plasmid DNA after uptake during transformation in Neisseria gonorrhoeae. An 11.5-kilobase plasmid, pFA10, was processed to linear double-stranded DNA during uptake by competent cells, but cleavage of pFA10 was not site specific. A minority of pFA10 entered as open circles. A 42-kilobase plasmid, pFA14, was degraded into small fragments during uptake; no intracellular circular forms of pFA14 were evident. Since pFA10 DNA linearized by a restriction enzyme was not further cut during uptake, the endonucleolytic activity associated with entry of plasmid DNA appeared to act preferentially on circular DNA. Although linear plasmid DNA was taken up into a DNase-resistant state as efficiently as circular DNA, linear plasmid DNA transformed much less efficiently than circular plasmid DNA. These data suggest that during entry transforming plasmid DNA often is processed to double-stranded linear molecules; transformants may arise when some molecules are repaired to form circles. Occasional molecules which enter as intact circles may also lead to transformants