Desempenho de metal de solda adequado para soldagem de componentes de ancoragem

O presente trabalho apresenta os resultados de um programa de pesquisa cujo objetivo principal é o desenvolvimento de consumíveis adequados para a soldagem de componentes de ancoragem fabricados em aços de alta resistência. Após avaliação de diferentes composições químicas, com base no balanço de Mn e Ni é feita uma análise detalhada das propriedades mecânicas e microestruturais da composição química que propiciou os melhores resultados para permitir uma conclusão decisiva. Foram soldadas juntas pelo processo eletrodo revestido utilizando consumíveis de 4,0 mm de diâmetro, com preaquecimento de 200 ºC, corrente contínua, posição plana e energia de soldagem nominal de 1,5 kJ / mm. Após a soldagem, foram realizados ensaios mecânicos (tensão, impacto Charpy-V, dureza) e metalográficos por microscopia ótica, microscopia eletrônica de varredura e EBSD em amostras removidas integralmente do metal de solda, tanto na condição de como soldado quanto após tratamento térmico pós-soldagem (TTPS) realizado a 600 ºC. Os resultados mostram que os metais de solda obtiveram propriedades mecânicas satisfatórias após o TTPS, sendo adequados para aplicação em componentes de ancoragem de acordo com a especificação IACS W22. Além disso, observou-se que a tenacidade ao impacto experimentou uma melhoria com o aumento do tempo de TTPS, o que é crucial para componentes com maiores espessuras. Palavras-chave: metal de solda, propriedades mecânicas, tratamento térmico, componentes de ancorage

Situational factors shape moral judgements in the trolley dilemma in Eastern, Southern and Western countries in a culturally diverse sample

The study of moral judgements often centres on moral dilemmas in which options consistent with deontological perspectives (that is, emphasizing rules, individual rights and duties) are in conflict with options consistent with utilitarian judgements (that is, following the greater good based on consequences). Greene et al. (2009) showed that psychological and situational factors (for example, the intent of the agent or the presence of physical contact between the agent and the victim) can play an important role in moral dilemma judgements (for example, the trolley problem). Our knowledge is limited concerning both the universality of these effects outside the United States and the impact of culture on the situational and psychological factors affecting moral judgements. Thus, we empirically tested the universality of the effects of intent and personal force on moral dilemma judgements by replicating the experiments of Greene et al. in 45 countries from all inhabited continents. We found that personal force and its interaction with intention exert influence on moral judgements in the US and Western cultural clusters, replicating and expanding the original findings. Moreover, the personal force effect was present in all cultural clusters, suggesting it is culturally universal. The evidence for the cultural universality of the interaction effect was inconclusive in the Eastern and Southern cultural clusters (depending on exclusion criteria). We found no strong association between collectivism/individualism and moral dilemma judgements. © 2022, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited

To which world regions does the valence–dominance model of social perception apply?

Abstract: Over the past 10 years, Oosterhof and Todorov’s valence–dominance model has emerged as the most prominent account of how people evaluate faces on social dimensions. In this model, two dimensions (valence and dominance) underpin social judgements of faces. Because this model has primarily been developed and tested in Western regions, it is unclear whether these findings apply to other regions. We addressed this question by replicating Oosterhof and Todorov’s methodology across 11 world regions, 41 countries and 11,570 participants. When we used Oosterhof and Todorov’s original analysis strategy, the valence–dominance model generalized across regions. When we used an alternative methodology to allow for correlated dimensions, we observed much less generalization. Collectively, these results suggest that, while the valence–dominance model generalizes very well across regions when dimensions are forced to be orthogonal, regional differences are revealed when we use different extraction methods and correlate and rotate the dimension reduction solution. Protocol registration: The stage 1 protocol for this Registered Report was accepted in principle on 5 November 2018. The protocol, as accepted by the journal, can be found at https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.7611443.v1. © 2021, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited

In COVID-19 health messaging, loss framing increases anxiety with Little-to-No concomitant benefits: Experimental evidence from 84 countries

The COVID-19 pandemic (and its aftermath) highlights a critical need to communicate health information effectively to the global public. Given that subtle differences in information framing can have meaningful effects on behavior, behavioral science research highlights a pressing question: Is it more effective to frame COVID-19 health messages in terms of potential losses (e.g., “If you do not practice these steps, you can endanger yourself and others”) or potential gains (e.g., “If you practice these steps, you can protect yourself and others”)? Collecting data in 48 languages from 15,929 participants in 84 countries, we experimentally tested the effects of message framing on COVID-19-related judgments, intentions, and feelings. Loss- (vs. gain-) framed messages increased self-reported anxiety among participants cross-nationally with little-to-no impact on policy attitudes, behavioral intentions, or information seeking relevant to pandemic risks. These results were consistent across 84 countries, three variations of the message framing wording, and 560 data processing and analytic choices. Thus, results provide an empirical answer to a global communication question and highlight the emotional toll of loss-framed messages. Critically, this work demonstrates the importance of considering unintended affective consequences when evaluating nudge-style interventions

A multi-country test of brief reappraisal interventions on emotions during the COVID-19 pandemic

Abstract: The COVID-19 pandemic has increased negative emotions and decreased positive emotions globally. Left unchecked, these emotional changes might have a wide array of adverse impacts. To reduce negative emotions and increase positive emotions, we tested the effectiveness of reappraisal, an emotion-regulation strategy that modifies how one thinks about a situation. Participants from 87 countries and regions (n = 21,644) were randomly assigned to one of two brief reappraisal interventions (reconstrual or repurposing) or one of two control conditions (active or passive). Results revealed that both reappraisal interventions (vesus both control conditions) consistently reduced negative emotions and increased positive emotions across different measures. Reconstrual and repurposing interventions had similar effects. Importantly, planned exploratory analyses indicated that reappraisal interventions did not reduce intentions to practice preventive health behaviours. The findings demonstrate the viability of creating scalable, low-cost interventions for use around the world. Protocol registration: The stage 1 protocol for this Registered Report was accepted in principle on 12 May 2020. The protocol, as accepted by the journal, can be found at https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.c.4878591.v1 © 2021, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited

Author Correction: A multi-country test of brief reappraisal interventions on emotions during the COVID-19 pandemic

Correction to: Nature Human Behaviour https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01173-x, published online 2 August 2021. In the version of this article initially published, the following authors were omitted from the author list and the Author contributions section for “investigation” and “writing and editing”: Nandor Hajdu (Institute of Psychology, ELTE Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest, Hungary), Jordane Boudesseul (Facultad de Psicología, Instituto de Investigación Científica, Universidad de Lima, Lima, Perú), Rafał Muda (Faculty of Economics, Maria Curie-Sklodowska University, Lublin, Poland) and Sandersan Onie (Black Dog Institute, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, Australia & Emotional Health for All Foundation, Jakarta, Indonesia). In addition, Saeideh FatahModares’ name was originally misspelled as Saiedeh FatahModarres in the author list. Further, affiliations have been corrected for Maria Terskova (National Research University Higher School of Economics, Moscow, Russia), Susana Ruiz Fernandez (FOM University of Applied Sciences, Essen; Leibniz-Institut für Wissensmedien, Tübingen, and LEAD Research Network, Eberhard Karls University, Tübingen, Germany), Hendrik Godbersen (FOM University of Applied Sciences, Essen, Germany), Gulnaz Anjum (Department of Psychology, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, Canada, and Department of Economics & Social Sciences, Institute of Business Administration, Karachi, Pakistan). The changes have been made to the HTML and PDF versions of the article