65 research outputs found

    The Importance of Moral Construal: Moral versus Non- Moral Construal Elicits Faster, More Extreme, Universal Evaluations of the Same Actions

    Get PDF
    Over the past decade, intuitionist models of morality have challenged the view that moral reasoning is the sole or even primary means by which moral judgments are made. Rather, intuitionist models posit that certain situations automatically elicit moral intuitions, which guide moral judgments. We present three experiments showing that evaluations are also susceptible to the influence of moral versus non-moral construal. We had participants make moral evaluations (rating whether actions were morally good or bad) or non-moral evaluations (rating whether actions were pragmatically or hedonically good or bad) of a wide variety of actions. As predicted, moral evaluations were faster, more extreme, and more strongly associated with universal prescriptions—the belief that absolutely nobody or everybody should engage in an action—than non-moral (pragmatic or hedonic) evaluations of the same actions. Further, we show that people are capable of flexibly shifting from moral to non-moral evaluations on a trial-by-trial basis. Taken together, these experiments provide evidence that moral versus non-moral construal has an important influence on evaluation and suggests that effects of construal are highly flexible. We discuss the implications of these experiments for models of moral judgment and decision- making

    The Importance of Moral Construal: Moral versus Non- Moral Construal Elicits Faster, More Extreme, Universal Evaluations of the Same Actions

    Get PDF
    Over the past decade, intuitionist models of morality have challenged the view that moral reasoning is the sole or even primary means by which moral judgments are made. Rather, intuitionist models posit that certain situations automatically elicit moral intuitions, which guide moral judgments. We present three experiments showing that evaluations are also susceptible to the influence of moral versus non-moral construal. We had participants make moral evaluations (rating whether actions were morally good or bad) or non-moral evaluations (rating whether actions were pragmatically or hedonically good or bad) of a wide variety of actions. As predicted, moral evaluations were faster, more extreme, and more strongly associated with universal prescriptions—the belief that absolutely nobody or everybody should engage in an action—than non-moral (pragmatic or hedonic) evaluations of the same actions. Further, we show that people are capable of flexibly shifting from moral to non-moral evaluations on a trial-by-trial basis. Taken together, these experiments provide evidence that moral versus non-moral construal has an important influence on evaluation and suggests that effects of construal are highly flexible. We discuss the implications of these experiments for models of moral judgment and decision- making

    Rapid social perception is flexible: approach and avoidance motivational states shape P100 responses to other-race faces

    Get PDF
    Research on person categorization suggests that people automatically and inflexibly categorize others according to group memberships, such as race. Consistent with this view, research using electroencephalography (EEG) has found that White participants tend to show an early difference in processing Black versus White faces. Yet, new research has shown that these ostensibly automatic biases may not be as inevitable as once thought and that motivational influences may be able to eliminate these biases. It is unclear, however, whether motivational influences shape the initial biases or whether these biases can only be modulated by later, controlled processes. Using EEG to examine the time course of biased processing, we manipulated approach and avoidance motivational states by having participants pull or push a joystick, respectively, while viewing White or Black faces. Consistent with previous work on own-race bias, we observed a greater P100 response to White than Black faces; however, this racial bias was attenuated in the approach condition. These data suggest that rapid social perception may be flexible and can be modulated by motivational states

    Early twentieth-century Vogue, George Wolfe Plank and the "Freaks of Mayfair"

    Get PDF
    Vogue was one of the most influential fashion magazines of the twentieth century. In the 1920s its British edition, launched in 1916, became a focus for various forms of queer visual and cultural expression. The origins of the related ‘amusing style’, which delighted in camp display, can be traced to the romantic and artistic collaboration between the American artist George Wolfe Plank and the British writer E. F. Benson during World War One. The illustrations that Plank produced for Benson’s book of satirical sketches of life in London’s high society, The Freaks of Mayfair (1916), shed light on the camp images that Plank designed for the covers of both the American and British editions of the magazine. Therefore, Plank can be understood to have played a key role in the development of queer visual culture during the early twentieth century

    Helical coherence of DNA in crystals and solution

    Get PDF
    The twist, rise, slide, shift, tilt and roll between adjoining base pairs in DNA depend on the identity of the bases. The resulting dependence of the double helix conformation on the nucleotide sequence is important for DNA recognition by proteins, packaging and maintenance of genetic material, and other interactions involving DNA. This dependence, however, is obscured by poorly understood variations in the stacking geometry of the same adjoining base pairs within different sequence contexts. In this article, we approach the problem of sequence-dependent DNA conformation by statistical analysis of X-ray and NMR structures of DNA oligomers. We evaluate the corresponding helical coherence length—a cumulative parameter quantifying sequence-dependent deviations from the ideal double helix geometry. We find, e.g. that the solution structure of synthetic oligomers is characterized by 100–200 Å coherence length, which is similar to ∼150 Å coherence length of natural, salmon-sperm DNA. Packing of oligomers in crystals dramatically alters their helical coherence. The coherence length increases to 800–1200 Å, consistent with its theoretically predicted role in interactions between DNA at close separations

    A synthesis of evidence for policy from behavioural science during COVID-19

    Get PDF
    Scientific evidence regularly guides policy decisions, with behavioural science increasingly part of this process. In April 2020, an influential paper proposed 19 policy recommendations (‘claims’) detailing how evidence from behavioural science could contribute to efforts to reduce impacts and end the COVID-19 pandemic. Here we assess 747 pandemic-related research articles that empirically investigated those claims. We report the scale of evidence and whether evidence supports them to indicate applicability for policymaking. Two independent teams, involving 72 reviewers, found evidence for 18 of 19 claims, with both teams finding evidence supporting 16 (89%) of those 18 claims. The strongest evidence supported claims that anticipated culture, polarization and misinformation would be associated with policy effectiveness. Claims suggesting trusted leaders and positive social norms increased adherence to behavioural interventions also had strong empirical support, as did appealing to social consensus or bipartisan agreement. Targeted language in messaging yielded mixed effects and there were no effects for highlighting individual benefits or protecting others. No available evidence existed to assess any distinct differences in effects between using the terms ‘physical distancing’ and ‘social distancing’. Analysis of 463 papers containing data showed generally large samples; 418 involved human participants with a mean of 16,848 (median of 1,699). That statistical power underscored improved suitability of behavioural science research for informing policy decisions. Furthermore, by implementing a standardized approach to evidence selection and synthesis, we amplify broader implications for advancing scientific evidence in policy formulation and prioritization

    The Brain Tumor Segmentation (BraTS) Challenge 2023: Focus on Pediatrics (CBTN-CONNECT-DIPGR-ASNR-MICCAI BraTS-PEDs)

    Full text link
    Pediatric tumors of the central nervous system are the most common cause of cancer-related death in children. The five-year survival rate for high-grade gliomas in children is less than 20\%. Due to their rarity, the diagnosis of these entities is often delayed, their treatment is mainly based on historic treatment concepts, and clinical trials require multi-institutional collaborations. The MICCAI Brain Tumor Segmentation (BraTS) Challenge is a landmark community benchmark event with a successful history of 12 years of resource creation for the segmentation and analysis of adult glioma. Here we present the CBTN-CONNECT-DIPGR-ASNR-MICCAI BraTS-PEDs 2023 challenge, which represents the first BraTS challenge focused on pediatric brain tumors with data acquired across multiple international consortia dedicated to pediatric neuro-oncology and clinical trials. The BraTS-PEDs 2023 challenge focuses on benchmarking the development of volumentric segmentation algorithms for pediatric brain glioma through standardized quantitative performance evaluation metrics utilized across the BraTS 2023 cluster of challenges. Models gaining knowledge from the BraTS-PEDs multi-parametric structural MRI (mpMRI) training data will be evaluated on separate validation and unseen test mpMRI dataof high-grade pediatric glioma. The CBTN-CONNECT-DIPGR-ASNR-MICCAI BraTS-PEDs 2023 challenge brings together clinicians and AI/imaging scientists to lead to faster development of automated segmentation techniques that could benefit clinical trials, and ultimately the care of children with brain tumors

    A synthesis of evidence for policy from behavioural science during COVID-19

    Get PDF
    Scientific evidence regularly guides policy decisions1, with behavioural science increasingly part of this process2. In April 2020, an influential paper3 proposed 19 policy recommendations (‘claims’) detailing how evidence from behavioural science could contribute to efforts to reduce impacts and end the COVID-19 pandemic. Here we assess 747 pandemic-related research articles that empirically investigated those claims. We report the scale of evidence and whether evidence supports them to indicate applicability for policymaking. Two independent teams, involving 72 reviewers, found evidence for 18 of 19 claims, with both teams finding evidence supporting 16 (89%) of those 18 claims. The strongest evidence supported claims that anticipated culture, polarization and misinformation would be associated with policy effectiveness. Claims suggesting trusted leaders and positive social norms increased adherence to behavioural interventions also had strong empirical support, as did appealing to social consensus or bipartisan agreement. Targeted language in messaging yielded mixed effects and there were no effects for highlighting individual benefits or protecting others. No available evidence existed to assess any distinct differences in effects between using the terms ‘physical distancing’ and ‘social distancing’. Analysis of 463 papers containing data showed generally large samples; 418 involved human participants with a mean of 16,848 (median of 1,699). That statistical power underscored improved suitability of behavioural science research for informing policy decisions. Furthermore, by implementing a standardized approach to evidence selection and synthesis, we amplify broader implications for advancing scientific evidence in policy formulation and prioritization

    A synthesis of evidence for policy from behavioural science during COVID-19

    Get PDF
    Scientific evidence regularly guides policy decisions 1, with behavioural science increasingly part of this process 2. In April 2020, an influential paper 3 proposed 19 policy recommendations (‘claims’) detailing how evidence from behavioural science could contribute to efforts to reduce impacts and end the COVID-19 pandemic. Here we assess 747 pandemic-related research articles that empirically investigated those claims. We report the scale of evidence and whether evidence supports them to indicate applicability for policymaking. Two independent teams, involving 72 reviewers, found evidence for 18 of 19 claims, with both teams finding evidence supporting 16 (89%) of those 18 claims. The strongest evidence supported claims that anticipated culture, polarization and misinformation would be associated with policy effectiveness. Claims suggesting trusted leaders and positive social norms increased adherence to behavioural interventions also had strong empirical support, as did appealing to social consensus or bipartisan agreement. Targeted language in messaging yielded mixed effects and there were no effects for highlighting individual benefits or protecting others. No available evidence existed to assess any distinct differences in effects between using the terms ‘physical distancing’ and ‘social distancing’. Analysis of 463 papers containing data showed generally large samples; 418 involved human participants with a mean of 16,848 (median of 1,699). That statistical power underscored improved suitability of behavioural science research for informing policy decisions. Furthermore, by implementing a standardized approach to evidence selection and synthesis, we amplify broader implications for advancing scientific evidence in policy formulation and prioritization

    Psicología social y moral de COVID-19 en 69 países

    Get PDF
    La pandemia de COVID-19 ha afectado a todos los ámbitos de la vida humana, incluido el tejido económico y social de las sociedades. Una de las estrategias centrales para gestionar la salud pública a lo largo de la pandemia ha sido el envío de mensajes persuasivos y el cambio de comportamiento colectivo. Para ayudar a los estudiosos a comprender mejor la psicología social y moral que subyace al comportamiento en materia de salud pública, presentamos un conjunto de datos compuesto por 51.404 individuos de 69 países. Este conjunto de datos se recopiló para el proyecto de la Colaboración Internacional en Psicología Social y Moral de COVID-19 (ICSMP COVID-19). Esta encuesta de ciencias sociales invitó a participantes de todo el mundo a completar una serie de medidas morales y psicológicas y actitudes de salud pública sobre COVID-19 durante una fase temprana de la pandemia de COVID-19 (entre abril y junio de 2020). La encuesta incluía siete grandes categorías de preguntas: Creencias sobre COVID-19 y conductas de cumplimiento; identidad y actitudes sociales; ideología; salud y bienestar; creencias morales y motivación; rasgos de personalidad; y variables demográficas. Presentamos los datos brutos y depurados, junto con todos los materiales de la encuesta, las visualizaciones de los datos y las evaluaciones psicométricas de las variables clave.The COVID-19 pandemic has affected all domains of human life, including the economic and social fabric of societies. One of the central strategies for managing public health throughout the pandemic has been through persuasive messaging and collective behaviour change. To help scholars better understand the social and moral psychology behind public health behaviour, we present a dataset comprising of 51,404 individuals from 69 countries. This dataset was collected for the International Collaboration on Social & Moral Psychology of COVID-19 project (ICSMP COVID-19). This social science survey invited participants around the world to complete a series of moral and psychological measures and public health attitudes about COVID-19 during an early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic (between April and June 2020). The survey included seven broad categories of questions: COVID-19 beliefs and compliance behaviours; identity and social attitudes; ideology; health and well-being; moral beliefs and motivation; personality traits; and demographic variables. We report both raw and cleaned data, along with all survey materials, data visualisations, and psychometric evaluations of key variables
    corecore