Measuring loss aversion under ambiguity: a method to make prospect theory completely observable

We propose a simple, parameter-free method that, for the first time, makes it possible to completely observe Tversky and Kahneman’s (1992) prospect theory. While methods exist to measure event weighting and the utility for gains and losses separately, there was no method to measure loss aversion under ambiguity. Our method allows this and thereby it can measure prospect theory’s entire utility function. Consequently, we can properly identify properties of utility and perform new tests of prospect theory. We implemented our method in an experiment and obtained support for prospect theory. Utility was concave for gains and convex for losses and there was substantial loss aversion. Both utility and loss aversion were the same for risk and ambiguity, as assumed by prospect theory, and sign-comonotonic trade-off consistency, the central condition of prospect theory, held

Low-Volume High-Intensity Interval Training in a Gym Setting Improves Cardio-Metabolic and Psychological Health.

BACKGROUND: Within a controlled laboratory environment, high-intensity interval training (HIT) elicits similar cardiovascular and metabolic benefits as traditional moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT). It is currently unclear how HIT can be applied effectively in a real-world environment. PURPOSE: To investigate the hypothesis that 10 weeks of HIT, performed in an instructor-led, group-based gym setting, elicits improvements in aerobic capacity (VO2max), cardio-metabolic risk and psychological health which are comparable to MICT. METHODS: Ninety physically inactive volunteers (42±11 y, 27.7±4.8 kg.m-2) were randomly assigned to HIT or MICT group exercise classes. HIT consisted of repeated sprints (15-60 seconds, >90% HRmax) interspersed with periods of recovery cycling (≤25 min.session-1, 3 sessions.week-1). MICT participants performed continuous cycling (~70% HRmax, 30-45 min.session-1, 5 sessions.week-1). VO2max, markers of cardio-metabolic risk, and psychological health were assessed pre and post-intervention. RESULTS: Mean weekly training time was 55±10 (HIT) and 128±44 min (MICT) (p<0.05), with greater adherence to HIT (83±14% vs. 61±15% prescribed sessions attended, respectively; p<0.05). HIT improved VO2max, insulin sensitivity, reduced abdominal fat mass, and induced favourable changes in blood lipids (p<0.05). HIT also induced beneficial effects on health perceptions, positive and negative affect, and subjective vitality (p<0.05). No difference between HIT and MICT was seen for any of these variables. CONCLUSIONS: HIT performed in a real-world gym setting improves cardio-metabolic risk factors and psychological health in physically inactive adults. With a reduced time commitment and greater adherence than MICT, HIT offers a viable and effective exercise strategy to target the growing incidence of metabolic disease and psychological ill-being associated with physical inactivity

Observing many researchers using the same data and hypothesis reveals a hidden universe of uncertainty

This study explores how researchers’ analytical choices affect the reliability of scientific findings. Most discussions of reliability problems in science focus on systematic biases. We broaden the lens to emphasize the idiosyncrasy of conscious and unconscious decisions that researchers make during data analysis. We coordinated 161 researchers in 73 research teams and observed their research decisions as they used the same data to independently test the same prominent social science hypothesis: that greater immigration reduces support for social policies among the public. In this typical case of social science research, research teams reported both widely diverging numerical findings and substantive conclusions despite identical start conditions. Researchers’ expertise, prior beliefs, and expectations barely predict the wide variation in research outcomes. More than 95% of the total variance in numerical results remains unexplained even after qualitative coding of all identifiable decisions in each team’s workflow. This reveals a universe of uncertainty that remains hidden when considering a single study in isolation. The idiosyncratic nature of how researchers’ results and conclusions varied is a previously underappreciated explanation for why many scientific hypotheses remain contested. These results call for greater epistemic humility and clarity in reporting scientific findings

Is variety the spice of life? An experimental investigation into the effects of species richness on self-reported mental well-being.

<div><p>Losses in biodiversity and trends toward urbanisation have reduced people’s contact with biodiverse nature, yet the consequences for mental well-being are not well understood. Here, we demonstrate that greater plant and animal species richness in isolation causes an improvement in mental well-being. To do so, the present research experimentally manipulated species richness and assessed widely-used indicators of mental well-being. Participants viewed short videos of either high or low tree (Study 1) or bird (Study 2) species richness and reported on positive (i.e., vitality, positive affect) and negative (i.e., anxiety) indicators of mental well-being. Building on Study 1, Study 2 included an urban environment as a reference treatment and explored the role of giving participants information on the presented environment. We find that, in line with expectations, watching videos containing greater species richness consistently leads to higher mental well-being. We discuss findings in light of the importance of connecting people to biodiverse environments.</p></div