Individuals, Collectives, and Individuals in Collectives: The Ineliminable Role of Dependence

Our beliefs are inextricably shaped through communication with others. Furthermore, even conversation we conduct in pairs may itself be taking place across a wider, connected social network. Our communications, and with that our thoughts, are consequently typically those of individuals in collectives. This has fundamental consequences with respect to how our beliefs are shaped. This article examines the role of dependence on our beliefs and seeks to demonstrate its importance with respect to key phenomena involving collectives that have been taken to indicate irrationality. It is argued that (with the benefit of hindsight) these phenomena no longer seem surprising when one considers the multiple dependencies that govern information acquisition and the evaluation of cognitive agents in their normal (i.e., social) context.

Knowledge through social networks: Accuracy, error, and polarisation

This paper examines the fundamental problem of testimony. Much of what we believe to know we know in good part, or even entirely, through the testimony of others. The problem with testimony is that we often have very little on which to base estimates of the accuracy of our sources. Simulations with otherwise optimal agents examine the impact of this for the accuracy of our beliefs about the world. It is demonstrated both where social networks of information dissemination help and where they hinder. Most importantly, it is shown that both social networks and a common strategy for gauging the accuracy of our sources give rise to polarisation even for entirely accuracy motivated agents. Crucially these two factors interact, amplifying one another's negative consequences, and this side effect of communication in a social network increases with network size. This suggests a new causal mechanism by which social media may have fostered the increase in polarisation currently observed in many parts of the world.

The impact of explanations as communicative acts on belief in a claim: The role of source reliability

Providing an explanation is a communicative act. It involves an explainee, a person who receives an explanation, and an explainer, a person (or sometimes a machine) who provides an explanation. The majority of research on explanation has focused on how explanations alter explainees' beliefs. However, one general feature of communicative acts is that they also provide information about the speaker (explainer). Work on argumentation suggests that the speaker's reliability interacts with the content of the speaker's message and has a significant impact on argument strength. In five experiments we explore the interplay between explanation, the explainee's confidence in what is being explained, and the explainer's reliability. Experiment 1 replicates results from previous literature on the impact of explanations on an explainee's confidence in what is being explained using real-world explanations. Experiments 2 and 3 show that providing an explanation not only impacts the explainee's confidence about what is being explained but also influences beliefs about the reliability of the explainer. Additionally, the two experiments demonstrate that the impact of explanation on the explainee's confidence is mediated by the reliability of the explainer. In Experiment 4, we experimentally manipulated the explainer's reliability and found that both the explainer's reliability and whether or not an explanation was provided have a significant effect on the explainee's confidence in what is being explained. In Experiment 5, we observed an interaction between providing an explanation and the explainer's reliability. Specifically, we found that providing an explanation has a significantly greater impact on the explainee's confidence in what is being explained when the explainer's reliability is low compared to when that reliability is high. Throughout the study we point to the important impact of background knowledge, warranting further studies on this matter.

Science Communication as a Collective Intelligence Endeavor: A Manifesto and Examples for Implementation

Effective science communication is challenging when scientific messages are informed by a continually updating evidence base and must often compete against misinformation. We argue that we need a new program of science communication as collective intelligence-a collaborative approach, supported by technology. This would have four key advantages over the typical model where scientists communicate as individuals: scientific messages would be informed by (a) a wider base of aggregated knowledge, (b) contributions from a diverse scientific community, (c) participatory input from stakeholders, and (d) better responsiveness to ongoing changes in the state of knowledge.

Argument and explanation

In this paper, we bring together two closely related, but distinct, notions: argument and explanation. We clarify their relationship. We then provide an integrative review of relevant research on these notions, drawn both from the cognitive science and the artificial intelligence (AI) literatures. We then use this material to identify key directions for future research, indicating areas where bringing together cognitive science and AI perspectives would be mutually beneficial. This article is part of a discussion meeting issue 'Cognitive artificial intelligence'.

Similarity and structured representation in human and nonhuman apes

How we judge the similarity between objects in the world is connected ultimately to how we represent those objects. It has been argued extensively that object representations in humans are 'structured' in nature, meaning that both individual features and the relations between them can influence similarity. In contrast, popular models within comparative psychology assume that nonhuman species appreciate only surface-level, featural similarities. By applying psychological models of structural and featural similarity (from conjunctive feature models to Tversky's Contrast Model) to visual similarity judgements from adult humans, chimpanzees, and gorillas, we demonstrate a cross-species sensitivity to complex structural information, particularly for stimuli that combine colour and shape. These results shed new light on the representational complexity of nonhuman apes, and the fundamental limits of featural coding in explaining object representation and similarity, which emerge strikingly across both human and nonhuman species.

Can counterfactual explanations of AI systems' predictions skew lay users' causal intuitions about the world? If so, can we correct for that?

Counterfactual (CF) explanations have been employed as one of the modes of explainability in explainable artificial intelligence (AI)-both to increase the transparency of AI systems and to provide recourse. Cognitive science and psychology have pointed out that people regularly use CFs to express causal relationships. Most AI systems, however, are only able to capture associations or correlations in data, so interpreting them as casual would not be justified. In this perspective, we present two experiments (total n = 364) exploring the effects of CF explanations of AI systems' predictions on lay people's causal beliefs about the real world. In Experiment 1, we found that providing CF explanations of an AI system's predictions does indeed (unjustifiably) affect people's causal beliefs regarding factors/features the AI uses and that people are more likely to view them as causal factors in the real world. Inspired by the literature on misinformation and health warning messaging, Experiment 2 tested whether we can correct for the unjustified change in causal beliefs. We found that pointing out that AI systems capture correlations and not necessarily causal relationships can attenuate the effects of CF explanations on people's causal beliefs.

Collectives and Epistemic Rationality

Consideration of collectives raises important questions about human rationality. This has long been known for questions about preferences, but it holds also with respect to beliefs. For one, there are contexts (such as voting) where we might care as much, or more, about the rationality of a collective than the rationality of the individuals it comprises. Here, a given standard may yield competing assessments at the individual and the collective level, thus giving rise to important normative questions. At the same time, seemingly rational strategies of individuals may have surprising consequences, or even fail, when exercised by individuals within collectives. This paper will illustrate these considerations with examples, provide an overview of different formal frameworks for understanding and assessing the beliefs of collectives, and it will illustrate how such frameworks can combine with simulations in order to elucidate epistemic norms.

BARD: A Structured Technique for Group Elicitation of Bayesian Networks to Support Analytic Reasoning

In many complex, real-world situations, problem solving and decision making require effective reasoning about causation and uncertainty. However, human reasoning in these cases is prone to confusion and error. Bayesian networks (BNs) are an artificial intelligence technology that models uncertain situations, supporting better probabilistic and causal reasoning and decision making. However, to date, BN methodologies and software require (but do not include) substantial upfront training, do not provide much guidance on either the model building process or on using the model for reasoning and reporting, and provide no support for building BNs collaboratively. Here, we contribute a detailed description and motivation for our new methodology and application, Bayesian ARgumentation via Delphi (BARD). BARD utilizes BNs and addresses these shortcomings by integrating (1) short, high-quality e-courses, tips, and help on demand; (2) a stepwise, iterative, and incremental BN construction process; (3) report templates and an automated explanation tool; and (4) a multiuser web-based software platform and Delphi-style social processes. The result is an end-to-end online platform, with associated online training, for groups without prior BN expertise to understand and analyze a problem, build a model of its underlying probabilistic causal structure, validate and reason with the causal model, and (optionally) use it to produce a written analytic report. Initial experiments demonstrate that, for suitable problems, BARD aids in reasoning and reporting. Comparing their effect sizes also suggests BARD's BN-building and collaboration combine beneficially and cumulatively.

When Science Becomes Embroiled in Conflict: Recognizing the Public's Need for Debate while Combating Conspiracies and Misinformation

Most democracies seek input from scientists to inform policies. This can put scientists in a position of intense scrutiny. Here we focus on situations in which scientific evidence conflicts with people's worldviews, preferences, or vested interests. These conflicts frequently play out through systematic dissemination of disinformation or the spreading of conspiracy theories, which may undermine the public's trust in the work of scientists, muddy the waters of what constitutes truth, and may prevent policy from being informed by the best available evidence. However, there are also instances in which public opposition arises from legitimate value judgments and lived experiences. In this article, we analyze the differences between politically-motivated science denial on the one hand, and justifiable public opposition on the other. We conclude with a set of recommendations on tackling misinformation and understanding the public's lived experiences to preserve legitimate democratic debate of policy.

Identification of distinct cytotoxic granules as the origin of supramolecular attack particles in T lymphocytes

Cytotoxic T lymphocytes (CTL) kill malignant and infected cells through the directed release of cytotoxic proteins into the immunological synapse (IS). The cytotoxic protein granzyme B (GzmB) is released in its soluble form or in supramolecular attack particles (SMAP). We utilize synaptobrevin2-mRFP knock-in mice to isolate fusogenic cytotoxic granules in an unbiased manner and visualize them alone or in degranulating CTLs. We identified two classes of fusion-competent granules, single core granules (SCG) and multi core granules (MCG), with different diameter, morphology and protein composition. Functional analyses demonstrate that both classes of granules fuse with the plasma membrane at the IS. SCG fusion releases soluble GzmB. MCGs can be labelled with the SMAP marker thrombospondin-1 and their fusion releases intact SMAPs. We propose that CTLs use SCG fusion to fill the synaptic cleft with active cytotoxic proteins instantly and parallel MCG fusion to deliver latent SMAPs for delayed killing of refractory targets.

Plausibility matters: A challenge to Gilbert's "Spinozan" account of belief formation

Most of the claims we encounter in real life can be assigned some degree of plausibility, even if they are new to us. On Gilbert's (1991) influential account of belief formation, whereby understanding a sentence implies representing it as true, all new propositions are initially accepted, before any assessment of their veracity. As a result, plausibility cannot have any role in initial belief formation on this account. In order to isolate belief formation experimentally, Gilbert, Krull, and Malone (1990) employed a dual-task design: if a secondary task disrupts participants' evaluation of novel claims presented to them, then the initial encoding should be all there is, and if that initial encoding consistently renders claims 'true' (even where participants were told in the learning phase that the claims they had seen were false), then Gilbert's account is confirmed. In this pre-registered study, we replicate one of Gilbert et al.'s (1990) seminal studies ("The Hopi Language Experiment") while additionally introducing a plausibility variable. Our results show that Gilbert's 'truth bias' does not hold for implausible statements - instead, initial encoding seemingly renders implausible statements 'false'. As alternative explanations of this finding that would be compatible with Gilbert's account can be ruled out, it questions Gilbert's account.

Optimism where there is none: Asymmetric belief updating observed with valence-neutral life events

How people update their beliefs when faced with new information is integral to everyday life. A sizeable body of literature suggests that people's belief updating is optimistically biased, such that their beliefs are updated more in response to good news than bad news. However, recent research demonstrates that findings previously interpreted as evidence of optimistic belief updating may be the result of flaws in experimental design, rather than motivated reasoning. In light of this controversy, we conduct three pre-registered variations of the standard belief updating paradigm (combined N = 300) in which we test for asymmetric belief updating with neutral, non-valenced stimuli using analytic approaches found in previous research. We find evidence of seemingly biased belief updating with neutral stimuli - results that cannot be attributed to a motivational, valence-based, optimism account - and further show that there is uninterpretable variability across samples and analytic techniques. Jointly, these results serve to highlight the methodological flaws in current optimistic belief updating research.

Reconsidering evidence of moral contagion in online social networks

The ubiquity of social media use and the digital data traces it produces has triggered a potential methodological shift in the psychological sciences away from traditional, laboratory-based experimentation. The hope is that, by using computational social science methods to analyse large-scale observational data from social media, human behaviour can be studied with greater statistical power and ecological validity. However, current standards of null hypothesis significance testing and correlational statistics seem ill-suited to markedly noisy, high-dimensional social media datasets. We explore this point by probing the moral contagion phenomenon, whereby the use of moral-emotional language increases the probability of message spread. Through out-of-sample prediction, model comparisons and specification curve analyses, we find that the moral contagion model performs no better than an implausible XYZ contagion model. This highlights the risks of using purely correlational evidence from large observational datasets and sounds a cautionary note for psychology's merge with big data.

Explaining Away, Augmentation, and the Assumption of Independence

In reasoning about situations in which several causes lead to a common effect, a much studied and yet still not well-understood inference is that of explaining away. Assuming that the causes contribute independently to the effect, if we learn that the effect is present, then this increases the probability that one or more of the causes are present. But if we then learn that a particular cause is present, this cause "explains" the presence of the effect, and the probabilities of the other causes decrease again. People tend to show this explaining away effect in their probability judgments, but to a lesser extent than predicted by the causal structure of the situation. We investigated further the conditions under which explaining away is observed. Participants estimated the probability of a cause, given the presence or the absence of another cause, for situations in which the effect was either present or absent, and the evidence about the effect was either certain or uncertain. Responses were compared to predictions obtained using Bayesian network modeling as well as a sensitivity analysis of the size of normative changes in probability under different information conditions. One of the conditions investigated: when there is certainty that the effect is absent, is special because under the assumption of causal independence, the probabilities of the causes remain invariant, that is, there is no normative explaining away or augmentation. This condition is therefore especially diagnostic of people's reasoning about common-effect structures. The findings suggest that, alongside earlier explanations brought forward in the literature, explaining away may occur less often when the causes are assumed to interact in their contribution to the effect, and when the normative size of the probability change is not large enough to be subjectively meaningful. Further, people struggled when given evidence against negative evidence, resembling a double negation effect.

Conditionals and testimony

Conditionals and conditional reasoning have been a long-standing focus of research across a number of disciplines, ranging from psychology through linguistics to philosophy. But almost no work has concerned itself with the question of how hearing or reading a conditional changes our beliefs. Given that we acquire much-perhaps most-of what we believe through the testimony of others, the simple matter of acquiring conditionals via others' assertion of a conditional seems integral to any full understanding of the conditional and conditional reasoning. In this paper we detail a number of basic intuitions about how beliefs might change in response to a conditional being uttered, and show how these are backed by behavioral data. In the remainder of the paper, we then show how these deceptively simple phenomena pose a fundamental challenge to present theoretical accounts of the conditional and conditional reasoning - a challenge which no account presently fully meets.

The impact of partial source dependence on belief and reliability revision

In this article, we explore how people revise their belief in a hypothesis and the reliability of sources in circumstances where those sources are either independent or are partially dependent because of their shared, common background. Specifically, we examine people's revision of perceived source reliability by comparison with a formal model of reliability revision proposed by Bovens and Hartmann (2003). This model predicts a U-shaped trajectory for revision in certain circumstances: If a source provides a positive report for an unlikely hypothesis, perceived source reliability should decrease; as additional positive reports emerge, however, estimates of reliability should increase. Participants' updates in our experiment show this U-shaped pattern. Furthermore, participants' responses also respect a second feature of the model, namely that perceived reliability should once again decrease when it becomes known that the sources are partially dependent. Participants revise appropriately both when a specific shared reliability is observed (e.g., sources went to the same, low quality school) and when integrating the possibility of shared reliability. These findings shed light on how people gauge source reliability and integrate reports when multiple sources weigh in on an issue as seen in public debates. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Argument Quality in Real World Argumentation

The idea of resolving dispute through the exchange of arguments and reasons has been central to society for millennia. We exchange arguments as a way of getting at the truth in contexts as diverse as science, the court room, and our everyday lives. In democracies, political decisions should be negotiated through argument, not deception, or even worse, brute force. If argument is to lead to the truth or to good decisions, then some arguments must be better than others and 'argument strength' must have some meaningful connection with truth. Can argument strength be measured in a way that tracks an objective relationship with truth and not just mere persuasiveness? This article describes recent developments in providing such measures.

Widening Access to Bayesian Problem Solving

Bayesian reasoning and decision making is widely considered normative because it minimizes prediction error in a coherent way. However, it is often difficult to apply Bayesian principles to complex real world problems, which typically have many unknowns and interconnected variables. Bayesian network modeling techniques make it possible to model such problems and obtain precise predictions about the causal impact that changing the value of one variable may have on the values of other variables connected to it. But Bayesian modeling is itself complex, and has until now remained largely inaccessible to lay people. In a large scale lab experiment, we provide proof of principle that a Bayesian network modeling tool, adapted to provide basic training and guidance on the modeling process to beginners without requiring knowledge of the mathematical machinery working behind the scenes, significantly helps lay people find normative Bayesian solutions to complex problems, compared to generic training on probabilistic reasoning. We discuss the implications of this finding for the use of Bayesian network software tools in applied contexts such as security, medical, forensic, economic or environmental decision making.

We might be wrong, but we think that hedging doesn't protect your reputation

We gain much of our knowledge from other people. Because people are fallible-they lie, mislead, and are mistaken-it seems essential to monitor their claims and their reliability as sources of information. An intuitive way to do this is to draw on our expectations about claims and sources: to perform expectation-based updating (Hahn, Merdes, & von Sydow, 2018). But this updating can have damaging consequences, leading us into a kind of confirmation bias. An alternative is to keep track of outcomes and record whether a claim proves true or false: to perform outcome-based updating (Hahn et al., 2018). This form of updating does not have the negative repercussions on belief accuracy. But both forms of updating might undermine the trust and cooperation assumed to be necessary for successful communication. We explore a potential boundary condition on these types of updating. We investigate whether speakers can protect their reputation when they make claims with low prior probability, with and without knowledge of the final outcome. We explore suggestions from McCready (2015) that speakers can protect themselves by hedging with evidential language: in particular with weaker propositional attitudes ("I suspect that . . .") and so-called double hedges ("I might be wrong, but I think . . ."). We find that both forms of updating are robust to hedging with this evidential language and find no clear evidence for a protective effect. We discuss extra ingredients that may allow successful hedging. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Cancellation, negation, and rejection

In this paper, new evidence is presented for the assumption that the reason-relation reading of indicative conditionals ('if A, then C') reflects a conventional implicature. In four experiments, it is investigated whether relevance effects found for the probability assessment of indicative conditionals (Skovgaard-Olsen, Singmann, & Klauer, 2016a) can be classified as being produced by (a) a conversational implicature, (b) a (probabilistic) presupposition failure, or (c) a conventional implicature. After considering several alternative hypotheses, and the accumulating evidence from other studies as well, we conclude that the evidence is most consistent with the Relevance Effect being the outcome of a conventional implicature. This finding indicates that the reason-relation reading is part of the semantic content of indicative conditionals, albeit not part of their primary truth-conditional content.

How Communication Can Make Voters Choose Less Well

With the advent of social media, the last decade has seen profound changes to the way people receive information. This has fueled a debate about the ways (if any) changes to the nature of our information networks might be affecting voters' beliefs about the world, voting results, and, ultimately, democracy. At the same time, much discussion in the public arena in recent years has concerned the notion that ill-informed voters have been voting against their own self-interest. The research reported here brings these two strands together: simulations involving agent-based models, interpreted through the formal framework of Condorcet's (1785) jury theorem, demonstrate how changes to information networks may make voter error more likely, even though individual competence has largely remained unchanged.

How Good Is Your Evidence and How Would You Know?

This paper examines the basic question of how we can come to form accurate beliefs about the world when we do not fully know how good or bad our evidence is. Here, we show, using simulations with otherwise optimal agents, the cost of misjudging the quality of our evidence. We compare different strategies for correctly estimating that quality, such as outcome- and expectation-based updating. We also identify conditions under which misjudgment of evidence quality can nevertheless lead to accurate beliefs, as well as those conditions where no strategy will help. These results indicate both where people will nevertheless succeed and where they will fail when information quality is degraded.

How We Can Rebuild Trust in Science-And Why We Must

"… Achieving our core mission, namely progress through knowledge, now requires two kinds of communication: one to our scientific peers, but another, more fraught yet critical, to the broader public. As scientists, we need to forge a better relationship between the world of research and the general public …" Read more in the Guest Editorial by K. Boele-Woelki, J. S. Francisco, U. Hahn, and J. Herz.

Practical implementation of the planar and spatial rotator in a complex tissue: the brain

In neuroscience, application of widely used stereological local volume estimators, including the planar rotator, is challenged by the combination of a complex tissue organisation and an estimator requirement of either isotropic or vertical sections, i.e. randomly oriented tissue. The spatial rotator is applicable with any tissue orientation but is sensitive to projection artefacts. The challenge is thus to select the most appropriate method for individual analyses. In this study, agreement between estimates of mean cell volume acquired with the vertical planar and the spatial rotator is assessed for two brain regions with different types of cytoarchitecture (motor cortex and hippocampal cornu ammonis 1). The possibility of using the planar rotator in tissues cut in an arbitrary direction is explored and requirements for a theoretically unbiased result as well as histological considerations are provided. LAY DESCRIPTION: Cells may change volume both during disease and with advancing age. Assessment of the volume of individual cells can therefore serve as a useful indicator of general tissue state. Most available methods to estimate cell volume in tissue sections, however, require that the tissue analysed has random orientation. Particularly for complex tissues such as the brain this is a challenge as identification, delineation and subdivision of many brain areas rely heavily on the use of anatomical atlases where illustrations depict the tissue in a few well-known orientations. In this study, the practical application of two different methods for estimating mean cell volumes in tissues cut in a preferred orientation is evaluated. Requirements for the feasibility of cell volume estimation without random tissue orientation as well as histological considerations are provided.

Activating KIR Haplotype Influences Clinical Outcome Following HLA-Matched Sibling Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation

Natural killer cells are thought to influence the outcome of hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT), impacting on relapse, overall survival, graft versus host disease and the control of infection, in part through the complex interplay between the large and genetically diverse killer immunoglobulin-like receptor (KIR) family and their ligands. This study examined the relationship between KIR gene content and clinical outcomes including the control of opportunistic infections such as cytomegalovirus in the setting of human leucocyte antigen (HLA)-matched sibling HSCT in an Australian cohort. The presence of the KIR B haplotype which contain more activating receptors in the donor, in particular centromeric B haplotype genes (Cen-B), was associated with improved overall survival of patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) undergoing sibling HSCT and receiving myeloablative conditioning. Donor Cen-B haplotype was also associated with reduced acute graft versus host disease grades II-IV whereas donor telomeric-B haplotype was associated with decreased incidence of CMV reactivation. In contrast, we were not able to demonstrate a reduced rate of relapse when the donor had KIR Cen-B, however relapse with a donor Cen-A haplotype was a competing risk factor to poor overall survival. Here we show that the presence of donor activating KIR led to improved outcome for the patient, potentially through reduced relapse rates and decreased incidence of acute GvHD translating to improved overall survival. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

A re-examination of "bias" in human randomness perception

Human randomness perception is commonly described as biased. This is because when generating random sequences humans tend to systematically under- and overrepresent certain subsequences relative to the number expected from an unbiased random process. In a purely theoretical analysis we have previously suggested that common misperceptions of randomness may actually reflect genuine aspects of the statistical environment, once cognitive constraints are taken into account which impact on how that environment is actually experienced (Hahn & Warren, Psychological Review, 2009). In the present study we undertake an empirical test of this account, comparing human-generated against unbiased process-generated binary sequences in two experiments. We suggest that comparing human and theoretically unbiased sequences using metrics reflecting the constraints imposed on human experience provides a more meaningful picture of lay people's ability to perceive randomness. Finally, we propose a simple generative model of human random sequence generation inspired by the Hahn and Warren account. Taken together our results question the notion of bias in human randomness perception. (PsycINFO Database Record

The Bi-directional Relationship between Source Characteristics and Message Content

Much of what we believe we know, we know through the testimony of others (Coady, 1992). While there has been long-standing evidence that people are sensitive to the characteristics of the sources of testimony, for example in the context of persuasion, researchers have only recently begun to explore the wider implications of source reliability considerations for the nature of our beliefs. Likewise, much remains to be established concerning what factors influence source reliability. In this paper, we examine, both theoretically and empirically, the implications of using message content as a cue to source reliability. We present a set of experiments examining the relationship between source information and message content in people's responses to simple communications. The results show that people spontaneously revise their beliefs in the reliability of the source on the basis of the expectedness of a source's claim and, conversely, adjust message impact by perceived reliability; hence source reliability and message content have a bi-directional relationship. The implications are discussed for a variety of psychological, philosophical and political issues such as belief polarization and dual-route models of persuasion.

The Semantics of Procedures and Diseases in SNOMED® CT

Objectives: SNOMED® CT is emerging as a reference terminology for the entire health care process. It claims to be founded on logic-based modelling principles. In this article, we analyze a special encoding scheme for diseases and procedures in SNOMED® CT, the so-called relationship groups (RGs), which had been devised to avoid ambiguities in definitions.

Methods: We reformulate SNOMED® CT’s relationship groups in the format of description logics in order to check whether RGs serve the needs they were designed for.

Results: We show that a considerable proportion of relationship groups represent hidden mereological relations. We also report discrepancies encountered between the defined semantics of many SNOMED® CT terms and their intuitive meaning, as well as inconsistencies detected between the definition of various complex composed terms and the definition of their top-level parents.

Conclusions: We formulate recommendations for improving SNOMED® CT by replacing most occurrences of relation groups by formally more adequate “part-of” relations.

MorphoSaurus

Objectives: We propose an interlingua-based indexing approach to account for the particular challenges that arise in the design and implementation of cross-language document retrieval systems for the medical domain.

Methods: Documents, as well as queries, are mapped to a language-independent conceptual layer on which retrieval operations are performed. We contrast this approach with the direct translation of German queries to English ones which, subsequently, are matched against English documents.

Results: We evaluate both approaches, interlingua-based and direct translation, on a large medical document collection, the OHSUMED corpus. A substantial benefit for interlingua-based document retrieval using German queries on English texts is found, which amounts to 93% of the (monolingual) English baseline.

Conclusions: Most state-of-the-art cross-language information retrieval systems translate user queries to the language(s) of the target documents. In contradistinction to this approach, translating both documents and user queries into a language-independent, concept-like representation format is more beneficial to enhance cross-language retrieval performance.

[Employed and self-employed specialists in outpatient ophthalmological care : Comparison with other specialist fields]

AIM

The aim of the study was to evaluate the contribution to outpatient care and the perspectives of employed and self-employed ophthalmologists in isolation and in comparison to other professional groups.

METHOD

Based on statistical data (source: statistical information provided by the National Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians) from 31 December 2015, newly admitted physicians in 2015 and their contribution differentiated by employment relationships were evaluated according to head count and working time equivalents (using "planning of demand equivalents"). The results were subdivided into type of outpatient facility, e.g. single practice, group practice and medical care centers (MVZ).

RESULTS

The proportion of employed ophthalmologists (head count) in outpatient care (23%) and newly admitted physicians (81%) is above the interdisciplinary average (16% and 65%, respectively). In all medical professional groups the contribution according to time equivalents of employed physicians compared to self-employed physicians is lower (utilization rate: 65% in total and 70% in ophthalmology). In ophthalmology employment is seen in all types of outpatient practices: the number of ophthalmologists working in group practices is above average, compared to other groups they are underrepresented in MVZ and are working in single practices as frequently as all other specialties.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Employment of physicians is more common in all types of outpatient ophthalmological facilities than in other specialized professional groups. Possible reasons are the working conditions in ophthalmology attracting physicians preferring employment and the competitive situation for practice takeover. Since employed physicians contribute less time to medical care than self-employed physicians, ophthalmology has a higher risk of a shortage in medical care despite an increasing number of physicians. An increasing number of employed physicians has an impact on the structures of outpatient care; however, the intensity of concentration in healthcare structures can only be partially evaluated due to insufficient data. Based on the available data there is no end in sight for the trend towards employment in outpatient ophthalmological care.

Scholarly Integrity

"… Scholarly integrity is not only the foundational bedrock of scientific inquiry, it is also the prerequisite for a positive image of scholarship … For individuals, integrity is an aspect of moral character and experience. For institutions, it is about creating an environment that promotes responsible conduct … In the first instance, research institutions must provide guidelines and codes of practice on scholarly integrity …" Read more in the Editorial by J. S. Francisco, U. Hahn, and H. Schwarz.

Ignore Similarity If You Can: A Computational Exploration of Exemplar Similarity Effects on Rule Application

It is generally assumed that when making categorization judgments the cognitive system learns to focus on stimuli features that are relevant for making an accurate judgment. This is a key feature of hybrid categorization systems, which selectively weight the use of exemplar- and rule-based processes. In contrast, Hahn et al. (2010) have shown that people cannot help but pay attention to exemplar similarity, even when doing so leads to classification errors. This paper tests, through a series of computer simulations, whether a hybrid categorization model developed in the ACT-R cognitive architecture (by Anderson and Betz, 2001) can account for the Hahn et al. dataset. This model implements Nosofsky and Palmeri's (1997) exemplar-based random walk model as its exemplar route, and combines it with an implementation of Nosofsky et al. (1994) rule-based model RULEX. A thorough search of the model's parameter space showed that while the presence of an exemplar-similarity effect on response times was associated with classification errors it was possible to fit both measures to the observed data for an unsupervised version of the task (i.e., in which no feedback on accuracy was given). Difficulties arose when the model was applied to a supervised version of the task in which explicit feedback on accuracy was given. Modeling results show that the exemplar-similarity effect is diminished by feedback as the model learns to avoid the error-prone exemplar-route, taking instead the accurate rule-route. In contrast to the model, Hahn et al. found that people continue to exhibit robust exemplar-similarity effects even when given feedback. This work highlights a challenge for understanding how and why people combine rules and exemplars when making categorization decisions.

Unrealistic comparative optimism: An unsuccessful search for evidence of a genuinely motivational bias

One of the most accepted findings across psychology is that people are unrealistically optimistic in their judgments of comparative risk concerning future life events—they judge negative events as less likely to happen to themselves than to the average person. Harris and Hahn (2011), however, demonstrated how unbiased (non-optimistic) responses can result in data patterns commonly interpreted as indicative of optimism due to statistical artifacts. In the current paper, we report the results of 5 studies that control for these statistical confounds and observe no evidence for residual unrealistic optimism, even observing a ‘severity effect’ whereby severe outcomes were overestimated relative to neutral ones (Studies 3 & 4). We conclude that there is no evidence supporting an optimism interpretation of previous results using the prevalent comparison method.

Who "believes" in the Gambler's Fallacy and why?

Humans possess a remarkable ability to discriminate structure from randomness in the environment. However, this ability appears to be systematically biased. This is nowhere more evident than in the Gambler's Fallacy (GF)-the mistaken belief that observing an increasingly long sequence of "heads" from an unbiased coin makes the occurrence of "tails" on the next trial ever more likely. Although the GF appears to provide evidence of "cognitive bias," a recent theoretical account (Hahn & Warren, 2009) has suggested the GF might be understandable if constraints on actual experience of random sources (such as attention and short term memory) are taken into account. Here we test this experiential account by exposing participants to 200 outcomes from a genuinely random (p = .5) Bernoulli process. All participants saw the same overall sequence; however, we manipulated experience across groups such that the sequence was divided into chunks of length 100, 10, or 5. Both before and after the exposure, participants (a) generated random sequences and (b) judged the randomness of presented sequences. In contrast to other accounts in the literature, the experiential account suggests that this manipulation will lead to systematic differences in postexposure behavior. Our data were strongly in line with this prediction and provide support for a general account of randomness perception in which biases are actually apt reflections of environmental statistics under experiential constraints. This suggests that deeper insight into human cognition may be gained if, instead of dismissing apparent biases as failings, we assume humans are rational under constraints. (PsycINFO Database Record

Preparing the lethal hit: interplay between exo- and endocytic pathways in cytotoxic T lymphocytes

Cytotoxic T lymphocytes patrol our body in search for infected cells which they kill through the release of cytotoxic substances contained in cytotoxic granules. The fusion of cytotoxic granules occurs at a specially formed contact site, the immunological synapse, and is tightly controlled to ensure specificity. In this review, we discuss the contribution of two intracellular compartments, endosomes and cytotoxic granules, to the formation, function and disassembly of the immunological synapse. We highlight a recently proposed sequential process of fusion events at the IS upon target cell recognition. First, recycling endosomes fuse with the plasma membrane to deliver cargo required for the docking of cytotoxic granules. Second, cytotoxic granules arrive and fuse upon docking in a SNARE-dependent manner. Following fusion, membrane components of the cytotoxic granule are retrieved through endocytosis to ensure the fast, efficient serial killing of target cells that is characteristic of cytotoxic T lymphocytes.

A pessimistic view of optimistic belief updating

Received academic wisdom holds that human judgment is characterized by unrealistic optimism, the tendency to underestimate the likelihood of negative events and overestimate the likelihood of positive events. With recent questions being raised over the degree to which the majority of this research genuinely demonstrates optimism, attention to possible mechanisms generating such a bias becomes ever more important. New studies have now claimed that unrealistic optimism emerges as a result of biased belief updating with distinctive neural correlates in the brain. On a behavioral level, these studies suggest that, for negative events, desirable information is incorporated into personal risk estimates to a greater degree than undesirable information (resulting in a more optimistic outlook). However, using task analyses, simulations, and experiments we demonstrate that this pattern of results is a statistical artifact. In contrast with previous work, we examined participants' use of new information with reference to the normative, Bayesian standard. Simulations reveal the fundamental difficulties that would need to be overcome by any robust test of optimistic updating. No such test presently exists, so that the best one can presently do is perform analyses with a number of techniques, all of which have important weaknesses. Applying these analyses to five experiments shows no evidence of optimistic updating. These results clarify the difficulties involved in studying human 'bias' and cast additional doubt over the status of optimism as a fundamental characteristic of healthy cognition.

Thalidomide in angiodysplasia-related bleeding

Gastrointestinal haemorrhage from angiodysplastic lesions is not only difficult to identify, but often refractory to endoscopic intervention. Patients often require substantial transfusion support. Thalidomide has emerged as a promising medical strategy in angiodysplasia-related bleeding. We present our experience and report the findings from a review of the literature. Despite its side-effect profile, thalidomide remains the therapeutic modality with the best evidence in this difficult clinical scenario.

Spatial representation of coherence

Four experiments examined spatial correlates of the experience of coherence, that is, the extent to which propositions "fit together." Experiment 1 demonstrates for Heiderian triads (i.e., sets of liking/disliking relations between 3 fictitious persons) that name pairs from balanced triads, such as 2 friends commonly disliking a third person (high coherence) are seen as closer to each other in physical space as compared to name pairs from unbalanced triads, such as 2 persons disliking each other and having a common friend (low coherence). This pattern of results is conceptually replicated in 2 further experiments for categorical syllogisms. Two terms in conclusions from valid syllogisms (high coherence) were seen as spatially closer to each other than when 2 terms came from invalid syllogisms (low coherence). In the final 2 experiments, similar closeness effects are demonstrated for word pairs from scenarios that "made sense" in terms of causal connectedness (latent causality) as opposed to word pairs from scenarios perceived as causally unconnected. These findings are discussed in the context of spatial binding theories, applied psychology, and embodied cognition in general, and their methodological implications are highlighted. (PsycINFO Database Record

Public Reception of Climate Science: Coherence, Reliability, and Independence

Possible measures to mitigate climate change require global collective actions whose impacts will be felt by many, if not all. Implementing such actions requires successful communication of the reasons for them, and hence the underlying climate science, to a degree that far exceeds typical scientific issues which do not require large-scale societal response. Empirical studies have identified factors, such as the perceived level of consensus in scientific opinion and the perceived reliability of scientists, that can limit people's trust in science communicators and their subsequent acceptance of climate change claims. Little consideration has been given, however, to recent formal results within philosophy concerning the relationship between truth, the reliability of evidence sources, the coherence of multiple pieces of evidence/testimonies, and the impact of (non-)independence between sources of evidence. This study draws on these results to evaluate exactly what has (and, more important, has not yet) been established in the empirical literature about the factors that bias the public's reception of scientific communications about climate change.

[Conception and Content Validation of a Questionnaire Relating to the Potential Need for Information of Visually Impaired Persons with Regard to Services and Contact Persons]

A questionnaire was drafted to identify the needs of visually impaired persons and to optimize their access to non-medical support and services. Subjects had to rate a list of 15 everyday activities that are typically affected by visual impairment (for example, being able to orient themselves in the home environment), by indicating the degree to which they perceive each activity to be affected, using a four-stage scale. They had to evaluate these aspects by means of a relevance assessment. The needs profile derived from this is then correlated with individualized information for assistance and support. The questionnaire shall be made available for use by subjects through advisers in some ophthalmic practices and via the internet. The validity of the content of the proposed tool was evaluated on the basis of a survey of 59 experts in the fields of medical, optical and psychological care and of persons involved in training initiatives. The experts were asked to rate the activities by relevance and clarity of the wording and to propose methods to further develop and optimize the content. The validity of the content was quantified according to a process adopted in the literature, based on the parameters Interrater Agreement (IRA) and Content Validity Index (CVI). The results of all responses (n = 19) and the sub-group analysis suggest that the questionnaire adequately reflects the potential needs profile of visually impaired persons. Overall, there was at least 80% agreement among the 19 experts for 93% of the proposed parameterisation of the activities relating to the relevance and clarity of the wording. Individual proposals for optimization of the design of the questionnaire were adopted.

A new compact soft x-ray spectrometer for resonant inelastic x-ray scattering studies at PETRA III

We present a newly designed compact grating spectrometer for the energy range from 210 eV to 1250 eV, which would include the Kα(1,2) emission lines of vital elements like C, N, and O. The spectrometer is based on a grazing incidence spherical varied line spacing grating with 2400 l/mm at its center and a radius of curvature of 58 542 mm. First, results show a resolving power of around 1000 at an energy of 550 eV and a working spectrometer for high vacuum (10(-4) mbar) environment without losing photon intensity.