The role of social cognition in decision making

Successful decision making in a social setting depends on our ability to understand the intentions, emotions and beliefs of others. The mirror system allows us to understand other people's motor actions and action intentions. ‘Empathy’ allows us to understand and share emotions and sensations with others. ‘Theory of mind’ allows us to understand more abstract concepts such as beliefs or wishes in others. In all these cases, evidence has accumulated that we use the specific neural networks engaged in processing mental states in ourselves to understand the same mental states in others. However, the magnitude of the brain activity in these shared networks is modulated by contextual appraisal of the situation or the other person. An important feature of decision making in a social setting concerns the interaction of reason and emotion. We consider four domains where such interactions occur: our sense of fairness, altruistic punishment, trust and framing effects. In these cases, social motivations and emotions compete with each other, while higher-level control processes modulate the interactions of these low-level biases

Implicit media frames: Automated analysis of public debate on artificial sweeteners

The framing of issues in the mass media plays a crucial role in the public understanding of science and technology. This article contributes to research concerned with diachronic analysis of media frames by making an analytical distinction between implicit and explicit media frames, and by introducing an automated method for analysing diachronic changes of implicit frames. In particular, we apply a semantic maps method to a case study on the newspaper debate about artificial sweeteners, published in The New York Times (NYT) between 1980 and 2006. Our results show that the analysis of semantic changes enables us to filter out the dynamics of implicit frames, and to detect emerging metaphors in public debates. Theoretically, we discuss the relation between implicit frames in public debates and codification of information in scientific discourses, and suggest further avenues for research interested in the automated analysis of frame changes and trends in public debates

Influencers on the Russian Twitter: Institutions vs. people in the discussion on migrants

With the emergence of discussion platforms like Twitter, the hopes rose that computer-mediated public sphere would become more even in access to discussion than mass-mediatized public sphere of the late 20th century. Scholars have argued that it will eventually form an ‘opinion crossroads’ where conflicts would be discussed by all the parties involved. But today, existing research provides mixed evidence on whether ordinary users, rather than mainstream media and institutional actors, can become influencers in discussions on current issues, e.g. relations between host and migrant communities. We focus on the Twitter discussion about an inter-ethnic conflict in Moscow’s Biryuliovo district in 2013 and aim at defining who were its real influencers by reconstructing the discussion’s web graph, as well as analyzing and juxtaposing its metrics to figures indicating user activity. Our results show that, despite hyperactivity of media accounts, they were largely absent as deliberative influencers, but the place of influencers was occupied by politicized (nationalist and liberal) accounts, rather by eyewitness reporters or public figures.This research has been supported in full by Russian Science Foundation (research grant 16-18-10125)

Early Exposures to Ecogenomics: Effects of Priming and Web Site Interactivity Among Adolescents

In the context of public introductions to emerging technologies, this study examined effects of priming and Web site interactivity on adolescents’ attitude development and information processing. In a four (priming) by three (interactivity levels) experiment, participants (N = 273) were required to search for and process Web-based information about ecogenomics. Results showed that priming ecogenomics as biotechnology, ecology, economy, or science in general did not affect attitude development. Interactivity levels, manipulated as low, medium, and high, were found to influence adolescents’ time invested in the information-processing task, perceived cognitive load, and Web site evaluations