Humans are ready to take advantage of benevolent AI

LUDWIG-MAXIMILIANS-UNIVERSITÄT MÜNCHEN

Research News

Humans expect that AI is Benevolent and trustworthy. A new study reveals that at the same time humans are unwilling to cooperate and compromise with machines. They even exploit them.

Picture yourself driving on a narrow road in the near future when suddenly another car emerges from a bend ahead. It is a self-driving car with no passengers inside. Will you push forth and assert your right of way, or give way to let it pass? At present, most of us behave kindly in such situations involving oth-er humans. Will we show that same kindness towards autonomous vehicles?

Using methods from behavioural game theory, an international team of researchers at LMU and the University of London have conducted large-scale online studies to see whether people would behave as cooperatively with artificial intelligence (AI) systems as they do with fellow humans.

Cooperation holds a society together. It often requires us to compromise with others and to accept the risk that they let us down. Traffic is a good example. We lose a bit of time when we let other people pass in front of us and are outraged when others fail to reciprocate our kindness. Will we do the same with machines?

Exploiting the machine without guilt

The study which is published in the journal iScience found that, upon first encounter, people have the same level of trust toward AI as for human: most expect to meet someone who is ready to cooperate.

The difference comes afterwards. People are much less ready to reciprocate with AI, and instead exploit its benevolence to their own benefit. Going back to the traffic example, a human driver would give way to another human but not to a self-driving car.

The study identifies this unwillingness to compromise with machines as a new challenge to the future of human-AI interactions.

"We put people in the shoes of someone who interacts with an artificial agent for the first time, as it could happen on the road," explains Dr. Jurgis Karpus, a behavioural game theorist and a philosopher at LMU Munich and the first author of the study. "We modelled different types of social encounters and found a consistent pattern. People expected artificial agents to be as cooperate as fellow humans. However, they did not return their benevolence as much and exploited the AI more than humans."

With perspectives from game theory, cognitive science, and philosophy, the researchers found that 'al-gorithm exploitation' is a robust phenomenon. They replicated their findings across nine experiments with nearly 2,000 human participants.

Each experiment examines different kinds of social interactions and allows the human to decide whether to compromise and cooperate or act selfishly. Expectations of the other players were also measured. In a well-known game, the Prisoner's Dilemma, people must trust that the other characters will not let them down. They embraced risk with humans and AI alike, but betrayed the trust of the AI much more often, to gain more money.

"Cooperation is sustained by a mutual bet: I trust you will be kind to me, and you trust I will be kind to you. The biggest worry in our field is that people will not trust machines. But we show that they do!" notes Prof. Bahador Bahrami, a social neuroscientist at the LMU, and one of the senior researchers in the study. "They are fine with letting the machine down, though, and that is the big difference. People even do not report much guilt when they do," he adds.

Benevolent AI can backfire

Biased and unethical AI has made many headlines--from the 2020 exams fiasco in the United Kingdom to justice systems--but this new research brings up a novel caution. The industry and legislators strive to ensure that artificial intelligence is benevolent. But benevolence may backfire.

If people think that AI is programmed to be benevolent towards them, they will be less tempted to co-operate. Some of the accidents involving self-driving cars may already show real-life examples: drivers recognize an autonomous vehicle on the road, and expect it to give way. The self-driving vehicle meanwhile expects for normal compromises between drivers to hold.

"Algorithm exploitation has further consequences down the line. If humans are reluctant to let a polite self-driving car join from a side road, should the self-driving car be less polite and more aggressive in order to be useful?" asks Jurgis Karpus.

"Benevolent and trustworthy AI is a buzzword that everyone is excited about. But fixing the AI is not the whole story. If we realize that the robot in front of us will be cooperative no matter what, we will use it to our selfish interest," says Professor Ophelia Deroy, a philosopher and senior author on the study, who also works with Norway's Peace Research Institute Oslo on the ethical implications of inte-grating autonomous robot soldiers along with human soldiers. "Compromises are the oil that make soci-ety work. For each of us, it looks only like a small act of self-interest. For society as a whole, it could have much bigger repercussions. If no one lets autonomous cars join the traffic, they will create their own traffic jams on the side, and not make transport easier".

###

 

IPBES/IPCC: Tackling the biodiversity and climate crises together, and their combined social impacts

Global experts identify key options for solutions; First-ever collaboration between IPBES- and IPCC-selected scientists

INTERGOVERNMENTAL SCIENCE-POLICY PLATFORM ON BIODIVERSITY AND ECOSYSTEM SERVICES (IPBES)

Research News

 

IMAGE: THE PEER-REVIEWED WORKSHOP REPORT IS THE PRODUCT OF A FOUR-DAY VIRTUAL WORKSHOP BETWEEN EXPERTS SELECTED BY A 12-PERSON SCIENTIFIC STEERING COMMITTEE ASSEMBLED BY THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL SCIENCE-POLICY PLATFORM ON BIODIVERSITY AND... view more 

CREDIT: IPBES

BONN, 10 June - Unprecedented changes in climate and biodiversity, driven by human activities, have combined and increasingly threaten nature, human lives, livelihoods and well-being around the world. Biodiversity loss and climate change are both driven by human economic activities and mutually reinforce each other. Neither will be successfully resolved unless both are tackled together.

This is the message of a workshop report, published today by 50 of the world's leading biodiversity and climate experts.

The peer-reviewed workshop report is the product of a four-day virtual workshop between experts selected by a 12-person Scientific Steering Committee assembled by the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) - the first-ever collaboration between these two intergovernmental bodies.

The report finds that previous policies have largely tackled biodiversity loss and climate change independently of each other, and that addressing the synergies between mitigating biodiversity loss and climate change, while considering their social impacts, offers the opportunity to maximize benefits and meet global development goals.

"Human-caused climate change is increasingly threatening nature and its contributions to people, including its ability to help mitigate climate change. The warmer the world gets, the less food, drinking water and other key contributions nature can make to our lives, in many regions" said Prof. Hans-Otto Pörtner, co-chair of the Scientific Steering Committee.

"Changes in biodiversity, in turn, affect climate, especially through impacts on nitrogen, carbon and water cycles," he said. "The evidence is clear: a sustainable global future for people and nature is still achievable, but it requires transformative change with rapid and far-reaching actions of a type never before attempted, building on ambitious emissions reductions. Solving some of the strong and apparently unavoidable trade-offs between climate and biodiversity will entail a profound collective shift of individual and shared values concerning nature - such as moving away from the conception of economic progress based solely on GDP growth, to one that balances human development with multiple values of nature for a good quality of life, while not overshooting biophysical and social limits."

The authors also warn that narrowly-focused actions to combat climate change can directly and indirectly harm nature and vice-versa, but many measures exist that can make significant positive contributions in both areas.

Among the most important available actions identified in the report are:

• Stopping the loss and degradation of carbon- and species-rich ecosystems on land and in the ocean, especially forests, wetlands, peatlands, grasslands and savannahs; coastal ecosystems such as mangroves, salt marshes, kelp forests and seagrass meadows; as well as deep water and polar blue carbon habitats. The report highlights that reducing deforestation and forest degradation can contribute to lowering human-caused greenhouse gas emissions, by a wide range from 0.4-5.8 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent every year.

• Restoring carbon- and species-rich ecosystems. The authors point to evidence that restoration is among the cheapest and quickest nature-based climate mitigation measures to implement - offering much-needed habitat for plants and animals, thus enhancing resilience of biodiversity in the face of climate change, with many other benefits such as flood regulation, coastal protection, enhanced water quality, reduced soil erosion and ensuring pollination. Ecosystem restoration can also create jobs and income, especially when taking into consideration the needs and access rights of indigenous peoples and local communities.

• Increasing sustainable agricultural and forestry practices to improve the capacity to adapt to climate change, enhance biodiversity, increase carbon storage and reduce emissions. These include measures such as diversification of planted crop and forest species, agroforestry and agroecology. Improved management of cropland and grazing systems, such as soil conservation and the reduction of fertilizer use, is jointly estimated by the report to offer annual climate change mitigation potential of 3-6 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent.

• Enhancing and better-targeting conservation actions, coordinated with and supported by strong climate adaptation and innovation. Protected areas currently represent about 15% of land and 7.5% of the ocean. Positive outcomes are expected from substantially increasing intact and effectively protected areas. Global estimates of exact requirements for effectively protected and conserved areas to ensure a habitable climate, self-sustaining biodiversity and a good quality of life are not yet well established but range from 30 to 50 percent of all ocean and land surface areas. Options to improve the positive impacts of protected areas include greater resourcing, better management and enforcement, and improved distribution with increased inter-connectivity between these areas. Conservation measures beyond protected areas are also spotlighted - including migration corridors and planning for shifting climates, as well as better integration of people with nature to assure equity of access and use of nature's contributions to people.

• Eliminating subsidies that support local and national activities harmful to biodiversity - such as deforestation, over-fertilization and over-fishing, can also support climate change mitigation and adaptation, together with changing individual consumption patterns, reducing loss and waste, and shifting diets, especially in rich countries, toward more plant-based options.

  Some focused climate mitigation and adaptation measures identified by the report as harmful to biodiversity and nature's contributions to people include:

• Planting bioenergy crops in monocultures over a very large share of land areas. Such crops are detrimental to ecosystems when deployed at very large scales, reducing nature's contributions to people and impeding achievement of many of the Sustainable Development Goals. At small scales, alongside pronounced and rapid reductions in fossil-fuel emissions, dedicated bioenergy crops for electricity production or fuels may provide co-benefits for climate adaptation and biodiversity.

• Planting trees in ecosystems that have not historically been forests and reforestation with monocultures - especially with exotic tree species. This can contribute to climate change mitigation but is often damaging to biodiversity, food production and other nature's contributions to people, has no clear benefits for climate adaptation, and may displace local people through competition for land.

• Increasing irrigation capacity. A common response to adapt agricultural systems to drought that often leads to water conflicts, dam building and long- term soil degradation from salinization.

• Any measures that focus too narrowly on climate change mitigation should be evaluated in terms of their overall benefits and risks, such as some renewable energies generating surges of mining activity or consuming large amounts of land. The same applies to some technical measures too narrowly focused on adaptation, such as building dams and sea walls. Although important options for mitigating and adapting to climate change exist, these can have large negative environmental and social impacts - such as interference with migratory species and habitat fragmentation. Such impacts can be minimized, for instance, by developing alternative batteries and long-lived products, efficient recycling systems for mineral resources, and approaches to mining that include strong considerations for environmental and social sustainability.

The report authors stress that while nature offers effective ways to help mitigate climate change, these solutions can only be effective if building on ambitious reductions in all human-caused greenhouse gas emissions. "Land and ocean are already doing a lot - absorbing almost 50% of CO2 from human emissions - but nature cannot do everything," said Ana María Hernández Salgar, Chair of IPBES. "Transformative change in all parts of society and our economy is needed to stabilize our climate, stop biodiversity loss and chart a path to the sustainable future we want. This will also require us to address both crises together, in complementary ways."

Highlighting the significance of the co-sponsored workshop, Dr. Hoesung Lee, Chair of the IPCC, said: "Climate change and biodiversity loss combine to threaten society - often magnifying and accelerating each other. By focusing on synergies and trade-offs between biodiversity protection and climate change mitigation and adaptation, this workshop advanced the debate on how to maximize benefits to people and the planet. It also represented an important step in collaboration between our two communities."

"It may be impossible to achieve win-win synergies, or even manage the tradeoffs between climate and biodiversity actions in every single patch of a landscape or seascape," said Prof. Pörtner, "But achieving sustainable outcomes becomes progressively easier when integrating a mix of actions at larger spatial scales, through cross-border collaboration and joint consultative spatial planning, which is why it is important to also address the lack of effective governance systems and mechanisms to improve integration between solutions for climate change and biodiversity."

###

The Governments of the United Kingdom and of Norway co-hosted the virtual workshop. "This is an absolutely critical year for nature and climate," said Lord Zac Goldsmith, UK Minister of State for Pacific and the Environment. "With the UN Biodiversity Conference in Kunming, and the Glasgow Climate Change Conference in the UK, we have an opportunity and responsibility to put the world on a path to recovery. This hugely valuable report by the experts of IPBES and IPCC makes it clear that addressing biodiversity loss and climate change together offers our best chance of doing so."

Sveinung Rotevatn, Norwegian Minister for Climate and Environment added: "Policies, efforts and actions to solve the global biodiversity and climate crises will only succeed if they are based on the best knowledge and evidence, which is why Norway welcomes this expert workshop report. It is clear that we cannot solve these threats in isolation - we either solve both or we solve neither."

Paying tribute to the work of all the authors and expert reviewers, the Executive Secretary of IPBES, Dr. Anne Larigauderie, also recalled the recent and tragic passing of Prof. Robert Scholes, the other Co-Chair of the workshop's Scientific Steering Committee, and his many contributions to both the IPCC and IPBES.

It is important to note that the workshop report has not been subjected to IPBES or IPCC review, and that IPBES and IPCC co-sponsorship of the workshop does not imply IPBES or IPCC endorsement or approval of the workshop or its conclusions.

The report is available post-embargo at http://www.ipbes.net/biodiversityclimatescience

Study of Harvey flooding aids in quantifying climate change

DOE/LAWRENCE BERKELEY NATIONAL LABORATORY

Research News

    SHARE

 PRINT  E-MAIL

IMAGE: TOP LEFT (A): SIMULATION OF THE ACTUAL FLOOD DEPTH (METERS) IN A SOUTH HOUSTON NEIGHBORHOOD. BOTTOM LEFT (B): SIMULATION OF THE COUNTERFACTUAL FLOOD IF CLIMATE CHANGE INCREASED PRECIPITATION BY 38%.... view more 

CREDIT: MICHAEL WEHNER, BERKELEY LAB

How much do the effects of climate change contribute to extreme weather events? It's hard to say--the variables involved are plentiful, each event is unique, and we can only do so much to investigate what didn't happen. But a new paper from Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) climate scientist Michael Wehner investigates the question for one particular element of one significant storm and makes the results available to those who lived through it.

In the paper, "Attributable human-induced changes in the magnitude of flooding in the Houston, Texas region during Hurricane Harvey," published May 19 in Climatic Change, Wehner and Christopher Sampson from Fathom Bristol used a hydraulic model--a mathematical model that can analyze the flow of fluid through a particular system of natural or human-made channels--to consider the degree to which human-caused climate change may have affected flooding in and around Houston during the massive 2017 storm, and the ways in which that flooding was distributed. Wehner and Sampson used resources at the National Energy Research Scientific Computing Center (NERSC) to quantify the increase in Houston flood area and depth from the hydraulic model output and to host a portal where other scientists and the public can access the data for their own use.

From August 26 through August 31, 2017, Hurricane Harvey stalled over the Houston area, flooding 154,000 structures and 600,000 cars; 37,000 people were displaced, and more than 70 died in the floodwaters. Adjusted for inflation, it was the second-most financially expensive tropical storm in United States history, costing between $85 billion and $125 billion.

Using previously published estimates (Risser and Wehner 2017; Von Oldenborg et al 2017; Wang et al 2018) stating a range of a 7% to 38% increase in precipitation during Hurricane Harvey due to climate change, Wehner and Sampson applied a hydraulic model to produce a range of simulations showing the distribution of flooding around the Houston area, illustrating a variety of outcomes for different levels of attribution to climate change.

According to Wehner, the computational simplicity of hydraulic models allows for extremely fine resolution simulations --in this case, about 30 meters (100 feet), or approximately the size of a single house and yard. Because of the granularity of the data, residents themselves can use the model to check the flood status of their homes or blocks in different modeled scenarios and see how climate change may have affected them directly.

"[The amount of flooding you experienced] depends a lot on where you are, whether you were victimized by the flood first of all, and then by whether climate change caused that flooding or not," said Wehner. "That's why this is an interesting data set. It's so high-resolution that people can search for their own houses, or at least their own blocks, and see whether their house was flooded because of climate change--at least according to these simulations."

That's part of the impetus of this study, he emphasized: not just publishing the results, but making them easily available to other professional scientists, community scientists, and any member of the public who wants to look at them. For example, Wehner has already begun sharing his data with a team of social scientists who plan to use the data to study the disproportionate distribution of impacts across ethnic groups in Houston. On a broader scale, a public-facing portal hosted at NERSC offers Wehner and Sampson's data in easily downloadable form, in addition to links to free software.

"It's a scientific paper, but it's really motivated as a public outreach," said Wehner. "I'm trying to empower the public to go out and do their own finding, for people to say, 'I want to know if climate change impacted my neighborhood.'"

In addition to community science and passing data on to other researchers, this study may also contribute to research on the economic impacts of climate change.

"At the end of the day, our best estimate is that 14% to 15% of the cost of flooding during Hurricane Harvey is because of climate change, which doesn't sound like a whole lot...but $13 billion does. And that's going to grow as climate change continues," said Wehner.

###

Chamoli disaster could happen again

UNIVERSITY OF ZURICH

Research News

 

IMAGE: DESTROYED TAPOVAN VISHNUGAD HYDROELECTRIC PLANT AFTER DEVASTATING DEBRIS FLOW OF FEB 7, 2021. view more 

CREDIT: (IRFAN RASHID, DEPARTMENT OF GEOINFORMATICS, UNIVERSITY OF KASHMIR)

Some four months ago, a devastating flood ravaged the Chamoli district in the Indian Himalayas, killing over 200 people. The flood was caused by a massive landslide, which also involved a glacier. Researchers at the University of Zurich, the WSL and ETH Zurich have now analyzed the causes, scope and impact of the disaster as part of an international collaboration.

On 7 February 2021, a massive wall of rock and ice collapsed and formed a debris flow that barreled down the Rishiganga and Dhauliganga river valleys, leaving a trail of devastation. The flood took more than 200 lives and destroyed two hydropower plants as well as several roads and bridges. A large international team including researchers from the University of Zurich (UZH), the Swiss Federal Institute for Forest, Snow and Landscape Research (WSL) and the ETH Zurich came together immediately after the disaster and began to investigate the cause and scope of the flood and landslide. Their study used satellite imagery, digital models of the terrain, seismic data and video footage to reconstruct the event with the help of computer models.

Avalanche of rock and ice

Twenty million cubic meters of rock had broken off from Ronti peak in Chamoli district in Uttarkhand at about 5,500 meters above sea level, including a steep hanging glacier with about 5.5 million cubic meters of ice. The massive avalanche, made up of rock (80%) and ice (20%), hurtled down the valley and the narrow gorge. Resulting energy from the friction melted almost all of the ice and led to a devastating mudflow.

The international cooperation analyzing the extreme event was coordinated by GAPHAZ, a scientific group of leading experts on glacier and permafrost hazards in mountains. Holger Frey from UZH's Department of Geography and GAPHAZ board member says: "The speed and breadth with which we analyzed the disaster is unprecedented. Only five years ago, having such extensive and high-resolution satellite imagery available so quickly was almost unthinkable."

Research work started immediately

The UZH researchers have been working in the Indian Himalayas for several years and were contacted by the Indian government's National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) only hours after the event. In the days that followed, they were able to provide the Indian authorities with initial insights on how the disaster unfolded and the processes involved. "Among other things, our reports and assessments were used to plan the on-site investigation," says Frey.

Hazardous hydropower projects

The deaths of more than 200 people, most of whom were non-local workers, and the destruction of the two hydropower plants added fuel to the ongoing debate about power plant projects in fragile alpine ecosystems. Following the devastating floods in Uttarakhand back in 2013, the hydropower industry was accused by the Supreme Court of India of having exacerbated the consequences of such floods with its practices. "The Chamoli disaster sadly confirms that many hydropower companies operating in the Himalayas are not doing enough to survey and monitor the increasingly unstable alpine environment," says co-author Christian Huggel from the UZH Department of Geography.

Impacts of climate change

The effects of climate change can also be felt below the surface. Temperatures inside mountains are rising in permafrost regions, increasing the likelihood of rockslides in alpine zones. Given the growing energy requirements in the Himalayan states, this problem is expected to get worse. "The Chamoli disaster was a rare extreme event," says Holger Frey. "But it's only a matter of time before the next such massive event will happen somewhere in the Himalayas." With several additional hydropower plants in planning, fast and sustainable solutions are needed - as well as close collaboration with scientists. "We must take advantage of the most advanced technologies and knowledge to better protect human lives and assets in the future," Christian Huggel says. Such rare disastrous events cannot be ruled out for other mountain regions either, and they can have disastrous effects, especially in regions with relative dense infrastructure such as the Alps.

CAPTION

Computer modeling of the Chamoli rock and ice avalanche.

CREDIT

(Ashim Sattar; UZH)

 

'Disagreeable' married men who shirk domestic responsibilities earn more at work

UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME

Research News

 

Married men who don't help out around the house tend to bring home bigger paychecks than husbands who play a bigger role on the domestic chores front.

New research from the University of Notre Dame shows that "disagreeable" men in opposite-sex marriages are less helpful with domestic work, allowing them to devote greater resources to their jobs, which results in higher pay.

In contemporary psychology, "agreeableness" is one of the "Big Five" dimensions used to describe human personality. It generally refers to someone who is warm, sympathetic, kind and cooperative. Disagreeable people do not tend to exhibit these characteristics, and they tend to be more self-interested and competitive.

"Why Disagreeableness (in Married Men) Leads to Earning More: A Theory and Test of Social Exchange at Home" is forthcoming in Personnel Psychology from lead author Brittany Solomon and Cindy Muir (Zapata), management professors at Notre Dame's Mendoza College of Business, along with Matthew Hall, the David A. Potenziani Memorial College Professor of Constitutional Studies and concurrent law professor at Notre Dame, and Elizabeth Campbell from the University of Minnesota.

"Across two studies, we find evidence that disagreeable men tend to earn more money relative to their more agreeable male counterparts because they are more self-interested and less helpful to their wives at home, which allows for greater job involvement and, ultimately, higher pay," Solomon said. "This effect is even stronger among disagreeable men with more traditional gender role attitudes and when their wives are highly conscientious, presumably because in these cases their wives take on more household management and more seamlessly carry out the responsibilities."

The concept may bring to mind the '50s and '60s sitcom "Leave it to Beaver," where Ward Cleaver always arrived home in time for dinner and June Cleaver wore dresses and pearls to clean floors. Did they have advanced understanding of their respective roles?

The study suggests that because these men are able to preserve more time and energy at home, they can invest these resources into their work and earn more. However, the team found that disagreeableness does not predict career success for more egalitarian men, those whose wives are less conscientious or any men outside opposite-sex marriages.

"While disagreeableness in the workplace may lead some employees to success, those hoping to attain higher pay should at least hesitate before leaning into a disagreeable workplace persona," Solomon cautioned. "Indeed, if self-interested and less communal work behavior was the only key to higher pay, then disagreeable men would tend to earn more, regardless of whether they were married, how they viewed gender roles or to whom they were married."

Prior research has shown that disagreeableness predicts financial success (especially for men), and this association is attributed to workplace behavior. However, this effect remains puzzling given that disagreeableness is negatively associated with valued workplace behaviors, such as cooperation and prosocial behavior. In contrast, the team theorizes the male disagreeableness premium can be further understood by considering imbalanced social exchanges at home, specifically with one's spouse. 

"Our findings build on the conventional wisdom that organizations seem to reward disagreeable workplace behaviors and highlight the importance of social exchange at home for success at work," Solomon said. "Our research suggests that organizations acknowledge the role that spousal exchange plays in individual success and points to the potential for organizations to refocus efforts to fuel job involvement on lightening the burden of at-home responsibilities. Doing so could allow employees to preserve resources that could then be invested in their jobs.

"Presumably, this type of initiative would be especially beneficial to those who do not have the persona and gender that, we found, naturally drives individually advantageous spousal exchange -- that is, everyone other than disagreeable, married men," she said. "To help those who do not have the built-in at-home arrangement that enhances job involvement and pay, organizations may consider investing in infrastructure that helps establish more level career-related playing fields."

These may include providing non-work resources, such as lists of reputable providers for home services and maintenance, establishing child care programs, pre-vetting caregivers or having couriers on retainer, which Solomon speculates may enhance job involvement even more than traditional work-focused incentives like bonuses.

"Practices that situate employees more equitably outside of work may offer more employees the opportunity to succeed," Solomon said. "Also, some research shows that men are stigmatized for taking advantage of flex work policies. Changing the organizational culture, in addition to implementing such policies, may influence calculations within a marriage or partnership about whose career should take priority and who should do more at home. Consequently, organizations may also help support initiatives aimed to promote gender diversity and inclusion, especially efforts to reduce male dominance in high-income positions."

The study also carries implications for career self-management. Most notably, the findings may influence how employees view other people's roles in their own success, beyond their boss and other organizational members, and help improve the understanding of how one's choice of romantic partner and social exchange at home can have substantial implications for one's career success.

"Professionals often publicly thank their spouses when receiving achievement awards or earning promotion," Solomon said. "And, at least for disagreeable men, our findings quantify the truth behind this sentiment."

###

Link to study: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/peps.12454

THIRD WORLD USA

Rural residents, American Indians travel farthest for certified stroke care

Stroke Journal Report

AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION

Research News

 

DALLAS, June 10, 2021 -- The distance a stroke patient must travel to receive care at a certified stroke center differs by race, age, income and insurance status, with the largest disparities found among rural residents and American Indians, according to a combined analysis of U.S. census data and road maps published today in Stroke, a journal of the American Stroke Association, a division of the American Heart Association.

Treatment for ischemic stroke, a blockage in an artery that supplies blood to the brain, restores blood flow to the brain. Rapid treatment is essential to reduce disability. Blood flow may be reestablished by administering intravenous clot-busting medication within 4.5 hours after the onset of stroke symptoms and ideally within one hour after hospital arrival. All certified stroke centers offer treatment with clot-busting medication as well as being staffed by medical professionals trained in stroke care and employ other measures to improve stroke care .

"Every day, those of us who treat stroke face the reality that our desire to help everyone competes with the fact that millions of Americans cannot reach us in time," said senior study author Akash Kansagra, M.D., M.S., associate professor of radiology, neurological surgery and neurology at Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis. "Stroke patients have a much better chance of recovery if they can get to a stroke hospital quickly. The question we wanted to address was whether certain Americans have to travel farther than others to receive the expertise that might save them if they have a stroke."

The 2019 American Heart Association/American Stroke Association guidelines recommend stroke patients be taken by emergency medical services to the nearest stroke-capable hospital, as well as using interactive videoconferencing to provide acute stroke care, also known as "telestroke," for patients in remote settings.

The American Heart Association with the Joint Commission collaborate to provide hospitals Acute Stroke Ready Certification, Primary Stroke Certification, Thrombectomy-Capable Stroke Certification and Comprehensive Stroke Certification to qualifying hospitals.

Researchers used a public mapping service to compare the road distance to the nearest certified stroke center for each census tract (small geographic areas defined for the U.S. census) in the 48 contiguous states and the District of Columbia. For each census tract, they gathered data from the U.S. Census Bureau's 2014-2018 American Community Survey on age, race, ethnicity, medical insurance status, income and population density. The analysis covered 98% of all U.S. census tracts, which include more than 316 million people and more than 2,300 stroke-certified hospitals.

Researchers noted the longest distances to stroke-certified centers were for people living in rural areas, rural areas with more elderly people, areas where fewer people had health insurance, census tracts with lower household income levels and with greater representation of American Indians.

Specifically:

• In rural areas, census tracts with more elderly residents were farther from stroke centers, with each 1% increase in people ages 65 or older representing a 0.31-mile longer distance to travel. There was no clear relationship between the density of the elderly population and distance to stroke care in urban areas.
• In both urban and rural areas, census tracts with a larger proportion of American Indian residents were farther from certified stroke care centers, with each 1% increase in the proportion of American Indians representing a 0.06-mile longer distance to travel in urban areas and a 0.66-mile longer distance in rural areas.
• In both urban and rural areas, tracts with more uninsured people were farther from stroke centers; each 1% increase in the proportion of patients that were uninsured represented a 0.01-mile longer difference to travel in urban areas and a 0.17-mile longer distance in rural areas.
• The relationship between income and distance to a certified stroke center was reversed between urban and rural areas. In urban areas, each $10,000 increase in median household income represented a 0.10-mile longer distance to travel. In rural areas, each $10,000 increase in household income represented a 3.13-mile shorter distance to travel.

"Beyond actual differences in geographic proximity to stroke care between urban and non-urban tracts, our analysis found remarkable differences in the associations between demographic characteristics and stroke care proximity in urban and rural settings," Kansagra said.

Kansagra said it was unclear why people over age 65 in rural areas were farther from certified stroke centers, "however, the trend is unsettling. While a stroke can occur at any age, the risk is higher in older adults. It is concerning that the people most likely to experience a stroke are also more likely to live far from a stroke hospital."

Researchers said the finding that a higher income level meant a greater distance to stroke care in urban areas but a lesser distance to travel in rural areas probably reflects the concentration of wealth in suburban areas. "What surprised me was that no such reversal occurred in areas where more residents did not have health insurance," Kansagra said. "No matter where we looked, areas with low levels of medical insurance were located farther from stroke care compared to areas with high levels of insurance."

Researchers said the entities that certify stroke-capable hospitals "must continue to encourage development and certification of stroke centers in non-urban areas and emphasize return on investment in terms of health benefit to citizens rather than financial benefit to hospitals." At the same time, state governments can develop more integrated and coordinated systems of care including emergency medical services capable of rapid triage and transfer of stroke patients to the most appropriate stroke center.

The study results also reinforce the importance of knowing about the stroke care centers within your community. "Not all hospitals have the resources to provide stroke care. Patients and their families can advocate for their well-being by insisting on being taken to a qualified stroke hospital," he said.

The current study is limited by relying in part on state websites to identify stroke centers and by the inability to consider policies that may instruct emergency medical services to bypass certain hospitals. Since traffic congestion can increase travel time in certain areas, the study is also limited by having measures of distance but not travel time.

An accompanying editorial by Michael T. Mullen, M.D., M.S. and Olajide A. Williams, M.D. M.S., recognized that this study builds on previous work but it did not distinguish between primary stroke centers and comprehensive centers, which offer different levels of stroke care.

In addition, Mullen and Williams write that the distance to a stroke hospital is only one piece of a much larger series of issues: "Geographic accessibility is not the same as realized access to care and may not translate into improved stroke outcomes. ... Systematic differences in hospital characteristics related to actual performance may also influence stroke outcomes independently of distance barriers. Notwithstanding, addressing the barriers posed by physical distance to stroke centers as highlighted in this study is a necessary and important pursuit."

Kansagra and his co-researchers are currently analyzing how far Americans need to travel to receive mechanical thrombectomy, a surgical procedure used to remove blood clots in patients who suffer from severe, clot-caused stroke.

To recognize stroke symptoms requiring immediate treatment, the American Stroke Association recommends everyone remember the acronym F.A.S.T. for Face drooping, Arm weakness, Speech difficulty, Time to call 9-1-1.

According to the American Heart Association's Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics -- 2021 Update, when considered separately from other cardiovascular disease, stroke ranks No. 5 among all causes of death in the U.S. and is a leading cause of serious disability in adults. Stroke occurs when a blood vessel to or in the brain either becomes blocked or bursts, preventing blood and oxygen from reaching all of the brain.

###

Co-authors with Kansagra are Cathy Y. Yu, B.S.; Timothy Blaine, B.S.; and Peter D. Panagos, M.D. No disclosures were reported.

The study was funded by the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences of the National Institutes of Health.

Additional Resources:

Multimedia is available on the right column of the release link: https://newsroom.heart.org/news/rural-residents-american-indians-travel-farthest-for-certified-stroke-care?preview=41eeb09020f9acb1c26bc54751c2e753

After June 10, 2021, view the manuscript and editorial online.

Find stroke centers in your areas

Disparities in stroke care at urban vs. rural hospitals impacts quality of care, patient survival

American Heart Association issues call to action for addressing inequities in rural health

Even short delays in the ER may reduce the lifespan of stroke survivors

Stroke deaths rise in rural areas, hold steady in cities

Why Getting Quick Stroke Treatment Is Important

Follow AHA/ASA news on Twitter @HeartNews

Follow news from Stroke, the ASA/AHA journal @StrokeAHA_ASA

Statements and conclusions of studies published in the American Heart Association's scientific journals are solely those of the study authors and do not necessarily reflect the Association's policy or position. The Association makes no representation or guarantee as to their accuracy or reliability. The Association receives funding primarily from individuals; foundations and corporations (including pharmaceutical, device manufacturers and other companies) also make donations and fund specific Association programs and events. The Association has strict policies to prevent these relationships from influencing the science content. Revenues from pharmaceutical and biotech companies, device manufacturers and health insurance providers are available here, and the Association's overall financial information is available here.

About the American Stroke Association

The American Stroke Association is a relentless force for a world with fewer strokes and longer, healthier lives. We team with millions of volunteers and donors to ensure equitable health and stroke care in all communities. We work to prevent, treat and beat stroke by funding innovative research, fighting for the public's health, and providing lifesaving resources. The Dallas-based association was created in 1998 as a division of the American Heart Association. To learn more or to get involved, call 1-888-4STROKE or visit stroke.org. Follow us on Facebook and Twitter.

 

Losing nature impacts Black, Hispanic, and low-income Americans most

Pioneering study shows loss of nature will exacerbate racial and income inequality

UNIVERSITY OF VERMONT

Research News

 

IMAGE: WHEN NATURE VANISHES, U.S. PEOPLE OF COLOR AND LOW-INCOME AMERICANS DISPROPORTIONALLY LOSE CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL AND HEALTH BENEFITS, FROM AIR QUALITY TO NATURAL DISEASE CONTROL. NEW RESEARCH SHOWS THAT LAND-USE CONVERSION... view more 

CREDIT: UNIVERSITY OF VERMONT

When nature vanishes, people of color and low-income Americans disproportionally lose critical environmental and health benefits--including air quality, crop productivity and natural disease control--a new study in Nature Communications finds.

The University of Vermont research is the first national study to explore the unequal impacts on American society--by race, income and other demographics--of projected declines in nature, and its many benefits, across the United States.

Focusing on three vital ecosystem services--air quality, crop pollination, and control of insect-borne disease (West Nile virus), researchers project that these benefits of nature will decrease for non-white people by an average of 224%, 118% and 111% between 2020 and 2100.

Researchers used advanced modeling to calculate changes in the distribution of these benefits by race, income levels, and population density (rural, urban, suburban).

"Given current and historical inequality in this country, our goal was to identify how future losses of nature might affect these racial and income disparities," says UVM researcher Jesse Gourevitch. "Unfortunately, we find that, in general, non-white, lower-income, and urban populations disproportionately bear the burden of declines in ecosystem benefits."

Opposing trends

Experts agree that in the future, urban populations are expected to grow, while rural populations shrink, and demographic groups become more segregated. Declines in nature will be largely driven by the conversion of forests and wetlands to cropland and urban development.

According to the study, land-use conversion trends are likely to be stronger in counties where marginalized populations are expected to grow. As a result, people of color are predicted to lose nature's benefits, while white communities are projected to see gains. Black and Hispanic people are expected to experience a substantial loss of benefits, in particular.

Among income groups, counties with the lowest per capita income are expected to experience the greatest losses in air quality and West Nile virus protection--while these benefits increase significantly in high income counties.

"By paying attention to race and income--which are often overlooked in environmental research--we can help leaders address inequities in their policy decisions, so that nature's benefits are distributed more equitably in the future," says UVM Prof. Taylor Ricketts, a global expert on measuring nature's benefits.

Troubling mismatches

Geographically, the study predicts significant "mismatches" between ecosystems benefits and human needs. For example, the team finds major declines in air quality and disease controls in urban counties where populations are expected to grow. Similarly, the researchers find steep declines in crop pollination--which is vital for farming--in rural areas, where agricultural productivity is most essential.

Beyond simply highlighting social and environmental problems, researchers say that targeted land use policies that factor in equity are needed to avoid exacerbating inequality in the U.S. These findings could also help to facilitate compensation for losses of nature's benefits among marginalized groups, they say.

"To be clear, these results don't imply that the U.S. is moving from an equitable baseline to an inequitable future," says UVM co-author Luz de Wit. "Today's inequities underpin the future disparities we estimate. For instance, Black and Hispanic people are currently disproportionately exposed to air pollution. That disparity, and others, are only expected to worsen in the future, without action."

###

The study was led by an international UVM team of researchers--representing Mexico, Colombia and the U.S., including Puerto Rico. Co-authors include: Jesse D. Gourevitch, Aura M. Alonso-Rodríguez, Natalia Aristizábal, Luz A. de Wit, Eva Kinnebrew, Caitlin E. Littlefield, Maya Moore, Charles C. Nicholson, Aaron J. Schwartz, and Taylor H. Ricketts.

Leaders who embrace on-job learning and listen to employees have more resilient teams, research show

RICE UNIVERSITY

Research News

 

HOUSTON - (June 10, 2021) - Leaders who encourage their employees to learn on the job and speak up with ideas and suggestions for change have teams that are more effective and resilient in the face of unexpected situations, according to new research from Rice University and the University of Windsor.

"A Resource Model of Team Resilience Capacity and Learning" will appear in a special issue of Group & Organization Management. Authors Kyle Brykman, an assistant professor at the Odette School of Business at the University of Windsor, and Danielle King, an assistant professor of psychological sciences at Rice, studied what makes employees more resilient and fosters learning in the workplace. The researchers specifically examined the interactions of 48 teams from five Canadian technology startups.

"Understanding what organizations can do to help employees become more resilient is the focus our work in my WorKing Resilience Research Laboratory," King said. "This research project offered an opportunity to uncover the important role of leadership and employee voice in the resilience process."

Brykman and King found that teams that were more effective and resilient if their bosses encourage employees to take risks, make suggestions and learn from the process. Creating a work environment centered around learning and open communication is helpful as teams grow and take on new tasks, King said. Leaders must reinforce this workplace culture with positive language that signals openness and a focus on their development, she said.

"Knowing that you have a leader who is focused on learning and not just on performance outcomes is critical," King said. "It's also important for them to be intentional about communicating this regularly to employees, as it can make all the difference in building more resilient teams. Leaders need to verbally reward a learning mindset. For example, when a boss responds to an employee who makes an on-the-job error by saying, 'Great, now you can learn from this experience,' rather than berating them for making a mistake, it makes a big difference."

To request a copy of the study, contact Amy McCaig, senior media relations specialist at Rice, at 713-348-6777 or amym@rice.edu.

###

This news release can be found online at news.rice.edu.

Follow Rice News and Media Relations on Twitter @RiceUNews.

Photo link: https://cpb-us-e1.wpmucdn.com/news-network.rice.edu/dist/c/2/files/2021/06/52037875_l.jpg

Photo credit: 123rf.com

New research shows link between politics, boredom and breaking public-health rules

UNIVERSITY OF WATERLOO

 NEWS RELEASE 10-JUN-2021

Research News

 

People who are more prone to boredom and who are socially conservative are more likely to break public-health rules, according to new psychology research.

While previous research demonstrated a connection between being highly prone to boredom and breaking social-distancing rules, this study demonstrated the association was more prominent as participants' social conservatism increased.

"Many public-health measures such as wearing a mask or getting a vaccine have become highly politicized," said James Danckert, professor of psychology at the University of Waterloo. "People who find these measures a threat to their identity, and who suffer from boredom a lot, find breaking the rules helps them re-establish a sense of meaning and identity. Boredom threatens our need to make meaning out of life and some things such as politics can strengthen our sense of identity and meaning."

For the study, researchers asked more than 900 people to respond to questions about boredom, political ideology and adhering to public-health measures such as wearing a mask or not socializing outside one's household. They then applied a variety of statistical analysis techniques to explore the relations that underly these elements.

As the pandemic continues, the work has implications for public-health policy and communications. For instance, focusing on what people can do rather than what they are restricted from doing. Such messaging could help provide a more positive framework to help people ground their sense of identity and control.

"Many of the restrictions have become heavily politicized and much of the messaging from governments has focused on personal responsibility," Danckert said. "But this can become finger pointing and blaming and most of us recoil from that. What we need is to promote our shared values - the things we all have in common and the positive things we can get back if we all pull together.

"It can be difficult for some people to cope with boredom and that can have serious consequences for an individual and for society at large. Boredom is not a trivial experience - it's worth paying attention to it."

The study, Boredom proneness, political orientation and adherence to social-distancing in the pandemic, appeared in the journal Motivation and Emotion and is a collaboration of researchers from the University of Waterloo, Duke University and Essex University.