Adaptive hypermedia driven serious game design and cognitive style in school settings: an exploratory study

The potential value of adaptive hypermedia and game based learning to education and training has long been recognised, numerous studies have been undertaken in both those areas investigating its potential to improve learner performance. In particular research has indicated that tailoring content to match the prior knowledge of the user has the power to increase the effectiveness of learning systems. Recent studies have begun to indicate that Adaptive Hypermedia Learning Systems (AHLS) based on cognitive styles have the power to improve learner performance. Recent examples of research exploring avenues for effectively incorporating serious games into AHLS indicated that integrating serious games into a personalized learning environment has the potential educational benefits of combining a personalized delivery with increased learner motivation. The exploratory study presented in this paper here developed an Adaptive Hypermedia Driven Serious Game (AHDSG) based around Pask’s Holist-Serialist dimension of cognitive style. A prototype AHDSG was designed and developed to teach students about Sutton Hoo and archaeological methods. Sixty-six secondary school students participated in this study. Overall the findings of this study show that there was an improvement in performance among all participants. Although the participants that used the system which adapted to their preferred cognitive style achieved a higher mean gain score, the difference was not significant

Human cooperation in groups: variation begets variation

Many experiments on human cooperation have revealed that individuals differ systematically in their tendency to cooperate with others. It has also been shown that individuals condition their behaviour on the overall cooperation level of their peers. Yet, little is known about how individuals respond to heterogeneity in cooperativeness in their neighbourhood. Here, we present an experimental study investigating whether and how people respond to heterogeneous behaviour in a public goods game. We find that a large majority of subjects does respond to heterogeneity in their group, but they respond in quite different ways. Most subjects contribute less to the public good when the contributions of their peers are more heterogeneous, but a substantial fraction of individuals consistently contributes more in this case. In addition, we find that individuals that respond positively to heterogeneity have a higher general cooperation tendency. The finding that social responsiveness occurs in different forms and is correlated with cooperativeness may have important implications for the outcome of cooperative interactions

Acute hunger does not always undermine prosociality

This is the final version. Available on open access from Nature Research via the DOI in this recordData Availability: The data that support the findings of this paper are available on the OSF website (https://osf.io/zexd7/?view_only=480593713c904397a033e751a6da7a69).It has been argued that, when they are acutely hungry, people act in self-protective ways by keeping resources to themselves rather than sharing them. In four studies, using experimental, quasi-experimental, and correlational designs (total N = 795), we examine the effects of acute hunger on prosociality in a wide variety of non-interdependent tasks (e.g. dictator game) and interdependent tasks (e.g. public goods games). While our procedures successfully increase subjective hunger and decrease blood glucose, we do not find significant effects of hunger on prosociality. This is true for both decisions incentivized with money and with food. Metaanalysis across all tasks reveals a very small effect of hunger on prosociality in noninterdependent tasks (d = .108), and a non-significant effect in interdependent tasks (d = -0.076). In study five (N = 197), we show that, in stark contrast to our empirical findings, people hold strong lay theories that hunger undermines prosociality.Volkswagen Foundatio

Theoretical framework and methodological development of common subjective health outcome measures in osteoarthritis: a critical review

Subjective measures involving clinician ratings or patient self-assessments have become recognised as an important tool for the assessment of health outcome. The value of a health outcome measure is usually assessed by a psychometric evaluation of its reliability, validity and responsiveness. However, psychometric testing involves an accumulation of evidence and has recognised limitations. It has been suggested that an evaluation of how well a measure has been developed would be a useful additional criteria in assessing the value of a measure. This paper explored the theoretical background and methodological development of subjective health status measures commonly used in osteoarthritis research. Fourteen subjective health outcome measures commonly used in osteoarthritis research were examined. Each measure was explored on the basis of their i) theoretical framework (was there a definition of what was being assessed and was it part of a theoretical model?) and ii) methodological development (what was the scaling strategy, how were the items generated and reduced, what was the response format and what was the scoring method?). Only the AIMS, SF-36 and WHOQOL defined what they were assessing (i.e. the construct of interest) and no measure assessed was part of a theoretical model. None of the clinician report measures appeared to have implemented a scaling procedure or described the rationale for the items selected or scoring system. Of the patient self-report measures, the AIMS, MPQ, OXFORD, SF-36, WHOQOL and WOMAC appeared to follow a standard psychometric scaling method. The DRP and EuroQol used alternative scaling methods. The review highlighted the general lack of theoretical framework for both clinician report and patient self-report measures. This review also drew attention to the wide variation in the methodological development of commonly used measures in OA. While, in general the patient self-report measures had good methodological development, the clinician report measures appeared less well developed. It would be of value if new measures defined the construct of interest and, that the construct, be part of theoretical model. By ensuring measures are both theoretically and empirically valid then improvements in subjective health outcome measures should be possible

A case report of Mycoplasma wenyonii associated immune-mediated haemolytic anaemia in a dairy cow

Background and case presentation: A three year old, second lactation Holstein dairy cow presented to the Scottish Centre for Production Animal Health and Food Safety, Glasgow University Veterinary School in November 2014 with a history of post-calving vulval/vaginal bleeding nine days prior to presentation, followed by a sudden reduction in milk yield. Subsequent investigations resulted in a diagnosis of immune-mediated haemolytic anaemia secondary to infection with Mycoplasma wenyonii. Conclusion: This report of a novel presentation of Mycoplasma wenyonii in a dairy cow illustrates the need to consider M.wenyonii as a potential differential diagnosis when a cow presents with anaemia and will discuss the potential implications of the condition at herd-level

Calibrating ADL-IADL scales to improve measurement accuracy and to extend the disability construct into the preclinical range: a systematic review

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Interest in measuring functional status among nondisabled older adults has increased in recent years. This is, in part, due to the notion that adults identified as 'high risk' for functional decline portray a state that is potentially easier to reverse than overt disability. Assessing relatively healthy older adults with traditional self-report measures (activities of daily living) has proven difficult because these instruments were initially developed for institutionalised older adults. Perhaps less evident, are problems associated with change scores and the potential for 'construct under-representation', which reflects the exclusion of important features of the construct (e.g., disability). Furthermore, establishing a formal hierarchy of functional status tells more than the typical simple summation of functional loss, and may have predictive value to the clinician monitoring older adults: if the sequence task difficulty is accelerated or out of order it may indicate the need for interventions.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This review identified studies that employed item response theory (IRT) to examine or revise functional status scales. IRT can be used to transform the ordinal nature of functional status scales to interval level data, which serves to increase diagnostic precision and sensitivity to clinical change. Furthermore, IRT can be used to rank items unequivocally along a hierarchy based on difficulty. It should be noted that this review is not concerned with contrasting IRT with more traditional classical test theory methodology.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>A systematic search of four databases (PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and PsychInfo) resulted in the review of 2,192 manuscripts. Of these manuscripts, twelve met our inclusion/exclusion requirements and thus were targeted for further inspection.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Manuscripts presented in this review appear to summarise gerontology's best efforts to improve construct validity and content validity (i.e., ceiling effects) for scales measuring the early stages of activity restriction in community-dwelling older adults. Several scales in this review were exceptional at reducing ceiling effects, reducing gaps in coverage along the construct, as well as establishing a formal hierarchy of functional decline. These instrument modifications make it plausible to detect minor changes in difficulty for IADL items positioned at the edge of the disability continuum, which can be used to signal the onset of progressive type disability in older adults.</p

Syndromics: A Bioinformatics Approach for Neurotrauma Research

Substantial scientific progress has been made in the past 50 years in delineating many of the biological mechanisms involved in the primary and secondary injuries following trauma to the spinal cord and brain. These advances have highlighted numerous potential therapeutic approaches that may help restore function after injury. Despite these advances, bench-to-bedside translation has remained elusive. Translational testing of novel therapies requires standardized measures of function for comparison across different laboratories, paradigms, and species. Although numerous functional assessments have been developed in animal models, it remains unclear how to best integrate this information to describe the complete translational “syndrome” produced by neurotrauma. The present paper describes a multivariate statistical framework for integrating diverse neurotrauma data and reviews the few papers to date that have taken an information-intensive approach for basic neurotrauma research. We argue that these papers can be described as the seminal works of a new field that we call “syndromics”, which aim to apply informatics tools to disease models to characterize the full set of mechanistic inter-relationships from multi-scale data. In the future, centralized databases of raw neurotrauma data will enable better syndromic approaches and aid future translational research, leading to more efficient testing regimens and more clinically relevant findings