Can You Activate Me? From Robots to Human Brain

L'efficacia dei robot sociali \ue8 stata ampiamente riconosciuta in diversi contesti della vita quotidiana degli umani, ma ancora poco si sa sulle aree cerebrali attivate osservando o interagendo con un robot. La ricerca che combina neuroscienze, scienze cognitive e robotica pu\uf2 fornire nuove intuizioni sia sul funzionamento del nostro cervello che sull'implementazione dei robot. Studi comportamentali sui robot sociali hanno dimostrato che la percezione sociale dei robot \ue8 influenzata da almeno due fattori: aspetto fisico e comportamento (Marchetti et al., 2018). Come possono le neuroscienze spiegare tali risultati? Ad oggi sono stati condotti studi attraverso l'utilizzo di tecniche sia EEG che fMRI per indagare le aree cerebrali coinvolte nell'interazione uomo-robot. Questi studi hanno affrontato principalmente le attivazioni cerebrali in risposta a paradigmi che coinvolgono o la performance di un'azione o la carica di una componente emotiva.The effectiveness of social robots has been widely recognized in different contexts of humans\u2019 daily life, but still little is known about the brain areas activated by observing or interacting with a robot. Research combining neuroscience, cognitive science and robotics can provide new insights into both the functioning of our brain and the implementation of robots. Behavioural studies on social robots have shown that the social perception of robots is influenced by at least two factors: physical appearance and behavior (Marchetti et al., 2018). How can neuroscience explain such findings? To date, studies have been conducted through the use of both EEG and fMRI techniques to investigate the brain areas involved in human-robot interaction. These studies have mainly addressed brain activations in response to paradigms involving either action performance or charged of an emotional component

Workers' individual and dyadic coping with the COVID-19 health emergency: A cross cultural study

The aim of this study was to examine workers' psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic as a function of their individual coping, dyadic coping, and work-family conflict. We also tested the moderating role of gender and culture in these associations. To achieve this aim, we run HLM analyses on data from 1521 workers cohabiting with a partner, coming from six countries (Italy, Spain, Malta, Cyprus, Greece, and Russia) characterized by various degrees of country-level individualism/collectivism. Across all six countries, findings highlighted that work-family conflict as well as the individual coping strategy social support seeking were associated with higher psychological distress for workers, while the individual coping strategy positive attitude and common dyadic coping were found to be protective against workers' psychological distress. This latter association, moreover, was stronger in more individualistic countries.WOS:000854798600001Scopus - Affiliation ID: 60105072Social Sciences Citation IndexQ2 - Q3Article; Early AccessUluslararası işbirliği ile yapılan - EVETSeptember2022YÖK - 2022-23Eylü

Dialectical behaviour therapy (DBT) for forensic psychiatric patients: An Italian pilot study

Background: Several previous randomised controlled trials of dialectical behaviour therapy (DBT) since Linehan's original have shown that it has an advantage over standard care or other psychological treatments, but focus is usually on suicide-related behaviours, and little is known about its effect with offender-patients. Aims: To evaluate DBT with a group of offender-patients in the Italian high intensity therapeutic facilities—the Residenze per l'Esecuzione delle Misure di Sicurezza (REMS), established under the Italian Law 81/2014. Methods: Twenty-one male forensic psychiatric in-patients with borderline personality disorder were enrolled and randomly assigned to 12 months of standard DBT together with all the usual REMS treatments (n = 10) or usual REMS treatments alone (n = 11). All participants completed the same pretreatment and posttreatment assessments, including the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale (BIS-11), Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale (DERS), and Toronto Alexithymia Scale 20 (TAS-20). Results: Men receiving DBT showed a significantly greater reduction in motor impulsiveness, as measured by the BIS-11, and emotional regulation, as reflected by the DERS total score, than the controls. There were no significant differences between groups in alexithymia scores. Conclusions: Italy has innovative forensic psychiatric facilities with a new recovery–rehabilitation approach, but the ambitious goals behind these cannot be achieved by pharmacology alone. For the first time in clinical forensic settings in Italy, there has been limited access to DBT. This small pilot study suggests this is likely to help ameliorate traits associated with violent and antisocial behaviours, so a full-scale randomised controlled trial should follow

A novel SCL-90-R six-item factor identifies subjects at risk of early adverse outcomes in public mental health settings

To increase access to treatment, Italy made assessment at community mental health centers (CMHCs) independent of medical referral, resulting in increased numbers of patients to be triaged efficiently. To support this process, we evaluated SCL-90-R item-ratings to identify factors that best predicted adverse early outcomes among persons seeking first-time CMHC care in a 24-month period in Rome. A psychiatric nurse screened subjects with a brief interview and self-administered SCL-90-R and psychiatrists provided CGI ratings and ICD-9 diagnosis. Of 832 screened subjects, 32 (3.85%) were hospitalized or attempted suicide within 90 days. Six SCL-90 items (15,41,55,57,78,88) scored much higher with than without such adverse outcomes; their sum is proposed as a predictive measure (“SCL-6″). In binary multivariable logistic modeling, this factor, but not age, sex, diagnosis, or other SCL-90-derived subscales strongly predicted adverse outcomes. A ROC curve for SCL-6 reflected a strong separation between subjects with versus without adverse outcomes (AUC = 0.76). This simple screening tool may support timely identification of patients at risk of early adverse clinical outcome who require especially close follow-up

Robots Are Not All the Same: Young Adults' Expectations, Attitudes, and Mental Attribution to Two Humanoid Social Robots

The human physical resemblance of humanoid social robots (HRSs) has proven to be particularly effective in interactions with humans in different contexts. In particular, two main factors affect the quality of human-robot interaction, the physical appearance and the behaviors performed by the robot. In this study, we examined the psychological effect of two HRSs, NAO and Pepper. Although some studies have shown that these two robots are very similar in terms of the human likeness, other evidence has shown some differences in their design affecting different psychological elements of the human partner. The present study aims to analyze the variability of the attributions of mental states (AMS), expectations of robotic development and negative attitudes as a function of the physical appearance of two HRSs after observing a real interaction with a human (an experimenter). For this purpose, two groups of young adults were recruited, one for the NAO (N\u2009=\u2009100, M\u2009=\u200920.22) and the other for the Pepper (N\u2009=\u200974, M\u2009=\u200921.76). The results showed that both the observation of interaction and the type of robot affect the AMS, with a greater AMS to Pepper robot compared to NAO. People's expectations, instead, are influenced by the interaction and are independent of the type of robot. Finally, negative attitudes are independent of both the interaction and the type of robot. The study showed that also subtle differences in the physical appearance of HSRs have significant effects on how humans perceived robots

Supplemental Material - Workers’ individual and dyadic coping with the COVID-19 health emergency: A cross cultural study

Supplemental Material for Workers’ individual and dyadic coping with the COVID-19 health emergency: A cross cultural study by Silvia Donato, Agostino Brugnera, Roberta Adorni, Sara Molgora, Eleonora Reverberi, Claudia Manzi, Maria Angeli, Anna Bagirova, Veronica Benet-Martinez, Liberato Camilleri, Frances Camilleri-Cassar, Evi Hatzivarnava Kazasi, Gerardo Meil, Maria Symeonaki, Ayça Aksu, Karina Batthyany, Ruta Brazienė, Natalia Genta, Annick Masselot and Suzy Morrissey in Journal of Social and Personal Relationships</p

Tocilizumab for patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. The single-arm TOCIVID-19 prospective trial

BackgroundTocilizumab blocks pro-inflammatory activity of interleukin-6 (IL-6), involved in pathogenesis of pneumonia the most frequent cause of death in COVID-19 patients.MethodsA multicenter, single-arm, hypothesis-driven trial was planned, according to a phase 2 design, to study the effect of tocilizumab on lethality rates at 14 and 30 days (co-primary endpoints, a priori expected rates being 20 and 35%, respectively). A further prospective cohort of patients, consecutively enrolled after the first cohort was accomplished, was used as a secondary validation dataset. The two cohorts were evaluated jointly in an exploratory multivariable logistic regression model to assess prognostic variables on survival.ResultsIn the primary intention-to-treat (ITT) phase 2 population, 180/301 (59.8%) subjects received tocilizumab, and 67 deaths were observed overall. Lethality rates were equal to 18.4% (97.5% CI: 13.6-24.0, P=0.52) and 22.4% (97.5% CI: 17.2-28.3, P&lt;0.001) at 14 and 30 days, respectively. Lethality rates were lower in the validation dataset, that included 920 patients. No signal of specific drug toxicity was reported. In the exploratory multivariable logistic regression analysis, older age and lower PaO2/FiO2 ratio negatively affected survival, while the concurrent use of steroids was associated with greater survival. A statistically significant interaction was found between tocilizumab and respiratory support, suggesting that tocilizumab might be more effective in patients not requiring mechanical respiratory support at baseline.ConclusionsTocilizumab reduced lethality rate at 30 days compared with null hypothesis, without significant toxicity. Possibly, this effect could be limited to patients not requiring mechanical respiratory support at baseline.Registration EudraCT (2020-001110-38); clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04317092)