28 research outputs found

    French Science Communication on YouTube: A Survey of Individual and Institutional Communicators and Their Channel Characteristics

    Get PDF
    Science videos on YouTube attract millions of viewers each month, but little is known about who the content producers are, how they work and what their motivations and qualifications are. Here, we analyze the characteristics of 622 French YouTube science channels and 70,795 science videos in French, and complement this analysis with a survey of 180 of these youtubers. We focus on three questions: who are the science communicators (sociodemographics, resources, and goals), what are the characteristics of their channels, and are there differences between institutional and non-institutional communicators. We show that French science communicators on YouTube are mostly young men, highly qualified and usually talking about their topic of expertize. Many of them do not earn enough money to make a living out of this activity and have to use personal money to run their channels. At the same time, many are not interested in making this activity their main source of income. Their main goal is to share science and stimulate curiosity, as opposed to teach and entertain. While a small number of channels account for most of the views and subscribers, together they are able to cover a lot of scientific disciplines, with individuals usually focusing on a couple of fields and institutions talking about more diverse subjects. Institutions seem to have less success on YouTube than individuals, a result visible both in the number of subscribers and engagement received in videos (likes and comments). We discuss the potential factors behind this discrepancy, such as the lack of personality of institutional channels, the high number of topics they cover or the fact that institutions usually have an additional goal compared to individuals: to present and promote the institution itself. A video version of this article has been recorded and made available here: https://stephanedebove.net/youtube</jats:p

    COVIDiSTRESS Global Survey dataset on psychological and behavioural consequences of the COVID-19 outbreak

    Get PDF
    This N = 173,426 social science dataset was collected through the collaborative COVIDiSTRESS Global Survey – an open science effort to improve understanding of the human experiences of the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic between 30th March and 30th May, 2020. The dataset allows a cross-cultural study of psychological and behavioural responses to the Coronavirus pandemic and associated government measures like cancellation of public functions and stay at home orders implemented in many countries. The dataset contains demographic background variables as well as measures of Asian Disease Problem, perceived stress (PSS-10), availability of social provisions (SPS-10), trust in various authorities, trustin governmental measures to contain the virus (OECD trust), personality traits (BFF-15), information behaviours, agreement with the level of government intervention, and compliance with preventive measures, along with a rich pool of exploratory variables and written experiences. A global consortium from 39 countries and regions worked together to build and translate a survey with variables of shared interests, and recruited participants in 47 languages and dialects. Raw plus cleaned data and dynamic visualizations are available.</div

    COVIDiSTRESS Global Survey dataset on psychological and behavioural consequences of the COVID-19 outbreak

    Full text link
    This N = 173,426 social science dataset was collected through the collaborative COVIDiSTRESS Global Survey – an open science effort to improve understanding of the human experiences of the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic between 30th March and 30th May, 2020. The dataset allows a cross-cultural study of psychological and behavioural responses to the Coronavirus pandemic and associated government measures like cancellation of public functions and stay at home orders implemented in many countries. The dataset contains demographic background variables as well as measures of Asian Disease Problem, perceived stress (PSS-10), availability of social provisions (SPS-10), trust in various authorities, trust in governmental measures to contain the virus (OECD trust), personality traits (BFF-15), information behaviours, agreement with the level of government intervention, and compliance with preventive measures, along with a rich pool of exploratory variables and written experiences. A global consortium from 39 countries and regions worked together to build and translate a survey with variables of shared interests, and recruited participants in 47 languages and dialects. Raw plus cleaned data and dynamic visualizations are available

    COVIDiSTRESS Global Survey dataset on psychological and behavioural consequences of the COVID-19 outbreak

    Get PDF
    This N = 173,426 social science dataset was collected through the collaborative COVIDiSTRESS Global Survey - an open science effort to improve understanding of the human experiences of the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic between 30th March and 30th May, 2020. The dataset allows a cross-cultural study of psychological and behavioural responses to the Coronavirus pandemic and associated government measures like cancellation of public functions and stay at home orders implemented in many countries. The dataset contains demographic background variables as well as measures of Asian Disease Problem, perceived stress (PSS-10), availability of social provisions (SPS-10), trust in various authorities, trust in governmental measures to contain the virus (OECD trust), personality traits (BFF-15), information behaviours, agreement with the level of government intervention, and compliance with preventive measures, along with a rich pool of exploratory variables and written experiences. A global consortium from 39 countries and regions worked together to build and translate a survey with variables of shared interests, and recruited participants in 47 languages and dialects. Raw plus cleaned data and dynamic visualizations are available.Measurement(s) psychological measurement center dot anxiety-related behavior trait center dot Stress center dot response to center dot Isolation center dot loneliness measurement center dot Emotional Distress Technology Type(s) Survey Factor Type(s) geographic location center dot language center dot age of participant center dot responses to the Coronavirus pandemic Sample Characteristic - Organism Homo sapiens Sample Characteristic - Location global Machine-accessible metadata file describing the reported data:Peer reviewe

    Les origines évolutionnaires du sens de l'équité chez l'Homme

    No full text
    Humans care about fairness and are ready to suffer financial losses for the sake of it. The existence of such costly preferences for fairness constitutes an evolutionary puzzle. Recently, some authors have argued that human fairness can be understood as a psychological adaptation evolved to solve the problem of sharing the costs and benefits of cooperation. When people can choose with whom they want to cooperate, sharing the costs and benefits in an impartial way helps to be chosen as a partner and brings direct fitness benefits. In this theory, partner choice is thus the central mechanism allowing the evolution of fairness. Here, we offer an interdisciplinary study of fairness to put this theory to the test. After a review of competing theories (Paper 1, in review), we build game-theoretical models and agent-based simulations to investigate whether partner choice can explain two key aspects of human fairness: the wrongness to take advantage of one's strength to exploit weaker people (Paper 2, Evolution), and the appeal of distributions where the reward is proportional to the contribution (Paper 3, in review). We show that partner choice succeeds at explaining these two characteristics. We also go towards more realistic and mechanism-oriented simulations by trying to evolve fair robots controlled by simple neural networks. We then test the theory empirically, and show that partner choice creates fairness in a behavioral experiment (Paper 4, Proceedings of the Royal Society B). We develop a collaborative video game to assess the cross-cultural variation of fairness in distributive situations, and present results coming from a Western sample (Paper 5, in preparation). We review the experiments looking for fairness in non-human animals, and discuss why fairness would have been more prone to evolve in humans than in any other species, despite partner choice being an evolutionary mechanism far from restricted to the human species. Finally, we discuss three common misunderstandings about the partner choice theory and identify interesting directions for future research.L'Homme attache de l'importance à l'équité et est prêt à aller jusqu'à subir des pertes financières pour la défense de l'équité. Cet attachement coûteux à l'équité constitue un paradoxe pour les théories de l'évolution. Récemment, certains auteurs ont proposé de voir le sens de l'équité comme une adaptation psychologique évoluée pour résoudre le problème du partage des coûts et bénéfices de la coopération. Quand il est possible de choisir avec qui coopérer, partager les coûts et bénéfices d'une manière impartiale aide à être choisi comme partenaire social et procure des bénéfices directs en terme de valeur sélective. Dans cette théorie, le choix du partenaire est donc le mécanisme central permettant l'évolution du sens de l'équité. Ici, nous proposons une étude interdisciplinaire de l'équité pour mettre cette théorie à l'épreuve. Après une revue des théories en compétition pour expliquer l'équité (Article 1, en cours de revue), nous développons des modèles de théorie des jeux et des simulations individu-centrées pour savoir si le choix du partenaire permet d'expliquer deux éléments-clés de l'équité: le refus de profiter de sa force pour exploiter les plus faibles (Article 2, Evolution), et l'attrait des distributions dans lesquelles la rétribution est proportionnelle à la contribution (Article 3, en cours de revue). Nous montrons que le choix du partenaire permet d'expliquer ces deux caractéristiques. Nous produisons également des simulations plus réalistes et prenant mieux en compte les mécanismes d'évolution en essayant de faire évoluer des robots qui se comportent de manière équitable. Nous testons ensuite la théorie de façon empirique, et montrons que le choix du partenaire crée des distributions équitables dans une expérience comportementale (Article 4, Proceedings of the Royal Society B). Nous développons un jeu vidéo collaboratif pour estimer l'importance de la variabilité interculturelle de l'équité dans des situations de justice distributive, et présentons des résultats obtenus sur un échantillon de sujets occidentaux (Article 5, en préparation). Nous passons en revue les expériences cherchant de l'équité chez les animaux non-humains, et discutons pourquoi un sens de l'équité aurait eu plus de chances de se développer chez l'Homme que dans une autre espèce, alors que le choix du partenaire est loin d'être un mécanisme évolutionnaire restreint à l'Homme. Enfin, nous discutons trois malentendus classiques sur la théorie du choix du partenaire et identifions des directions de recherche intéressantes pour le futur

    data_fairness_review_Debove.rar

    No full text
    Data related to the paper:<br><br> Debove, S., et al., Models of the evolution of fairness in the ultimatum game: a review and classification, Evolution and Human Behavior (2015), http://www.ehbonline.org/article/S1090-5138%2816%2900003-9/abstract<br><br>For more information please refer to http://stephanedebove.net/?p=239<br><br>Contents of the zipped file:<br><br>- 5_models_replicated contains the Netlogo code for the 5 main models of the evolution of fairness we have replicated. You need Netlogo to run these files (free software https://ccl.northwestern.edu/netlogo/ ).<br>- data_replication_nowak_2000_with_restriction contains the data txt files of the 20 simulation runs of the original model by Nowak (2000) that we replicated.<br>- data_replication_nowak_2000_without_restriction contains the data txt files of the 20 simulation runs of the original model by Nowak (2000) that we replicated, WITHOUT the restriction that 1-p > q<br>- notebook_to_produce_fig1.nb is the Mathematica Notebook used to analyse the raw data of the two data folders. You need to have Mathematica installed on your computer in order to open this file.<br><br

    Data from: Partner choice creates fairness in humans

    No full text
    Many studies demonstrate that partner choice has played an important role in the evolution of human cooperation, but little work has tested its impact on the evolution of human fairness. In experiments involving divisions of money, people become either over-generous or over-selfish when they are in competition to be chosen as cooperative partners. Hence, it is difficult to see how partner choice could result in the evolution of fair, equal divisions. Here, we show that this puzzle can be solved if we consider the outside options on which partner choice operates. We conduct a behavioural experiment, run agent-based simulations and analyse a game-theoretic model to understand how outside options affect partner choice and fairness. All support the conclusion that partner choice leads to fairness only when individuals have equal outside options. We discuss how this condition has been met in our evolutionary history, and the implications of these findings for our understanding of other aspects of fairness less specific than preferences for equal divisions of resources

    Correction: On the evolutionary origins of equity.

    No full text
    [This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0173636.]

    Data from: Evolution of equal division among unequal partners.

    No full text
    One of the hallmarks of human fairness is its insensitivity to power: while strong individuals are often in a position to coerce weak individuals, fairness requires them to share the benefits of cooperation equally. The existence of such egalitarianism is poorly explained by current evolutionary models. We present a model based on cooperation and partner choice that can account for the emergence of a psychological disposition toward fairness, whatever the balance of power between the cooperative partners. We model the evolution of the division of a benefit in an interaction similar to an ultimatum game, in a population made up of individuals of variable strength. The model shows that strong individuals will not receive any advantage from their strength, instead having to share the benefits of cooperation equally with weak individuals at the evolutionary equilibrium, a result that is robust to variations in population size and the proportion of weak individuals. We discuss how this model suggests an explanation for why egalitarian behaviors towards everyone, including the weak, should be more likely to evolve in humans than in any other species

    Models of the evolution of fairness in the ultimatum game: a review and classification

    No full text
    International audienceIn the ultimatum game, two people need to agree on the division of a sum of money. People usually divide money equally for the sake of fairness, and prefer to suffer financial losses rather than accept unfair divisions, contradicting the predictions of orthodox game theory. Models aimed at accounting for the evolution of such irrational preferences have put forward a great variety of explanations: biological, cultural, learning-based, human-specific (or not), etc. This diversity reflects the current absence of consensus in the scientific community, and possibly even an absence of debate. Here, we review 36 theoretical models of the evolution of human fairness published in the last 30 years, and identify six families into which they can all be broadly classified. We point out connections between the different families, and instantiate five of the mainstream models in the form of agent-based simulations for purposes of comparison. We identify a variety of theoretical, terminological, and conceptual problems that currently undermine progress in the field. Finally, we suggest directions for future research, and in particular the modeling of the evolution of fairness in a wider and more realistic range of situations
    corecore