Negotiation of risk in sexual relationships and reproductive decision-making amongst HIV sero-different couples

The paper focuses on the ways in which medical discourses of HIV transmission risk, personal bodily meanings and reproductive decision-making are re-negotiated within the context of sero-different relationships, in which one partner is known to be HIV-positive. Eighteen in-depth interviews were conducted with 10 individuals in Northern Ireland during 2008–2009. Drawing on an embodied sociological approach, the findings show that physical pleasure, love, commitment, a desire to conceive without medical interventions and a dislike of condoms within regular ongoing relationships, shaped individuals' sense of biological risk. In addition, the subjective logic that a partner had not previously become infected through unprotected sex prior to knowledge of HIV status and the added security of an undetectable viral load significantly impacted upon women's and, especially, men's decisions to have unprotected sex in order to conceive. The findings speak to the importance of reframing public health campaigns and clinical counselling discourses on HIV risk transmission to acknowledge how couples negotiate this risk, alongside pleasure and commitment within ongoing relationships.

Bridging Jeffrey's Rule, AGM Revision and Dempster Conditioning in the Theory of Evidence

Belief revision characterizes the process of revising an agent’s beliefs when receiving new evidence. In the field of artificial intelligence, revision strategies have been extensively studied in the context of logic-based formalisms and probability kinematics. However, so far there is not much literature on this topic in evidence theory. In contrast, combination rules proposed so far in the theory of evidence, especially Dempster rule, are symmetric. They rely on a basic assumption, that is, pieces of evidence being combined are considered to be on a par, i.e. play the same role. When one source of evidence is less reliable than another, it is possible to discount it and then a symmetric combination operation
is still used. In the case of revision, the idea is to let prior knowledge of an agent be altered by some input information. The change problem is thus intrinsically asymmetric. Assuming the input information is reliable, it should be retained whilst the prior information should be changed minimally to that effect. To deal with this issue, this paper defines the notion of revision for the theory of evidence in such a way as to bring together probabilistic and logical views. Several revision rules previously proposed are reviewed and we advocate one of them as better corresponding to the idea of revision. It is extended to cope with inconsistency between prior and input information. It reduces to Dempster
rule of combination, just like revision in the sense of Alchourron, Gardenfors, and Makinson (AGM) reduces to expansion, when the input is strongly consistent with the prior belief function. Properties of this revision rule are also investigated and it is shown to generalize Jeffrey’s rule of updating, Dempster rule of conditioning and a form of AGM revision.

Analyzing the degree of conflict among belief functions.

The study of alternative combination rules in DS theory when evidence is in conflict has emerged again recently as an interesting topic, especially in data/information fusion applications. These studies have mainly focused on investigating which alternative would be appropriate for which conflicting situation, under the assumption that a conflict is identified. The issue of detection (or identification) of conflict among evidence has been ignored. In this paper, we formally define when two basic belief assignments are in conflict. This definition deploys quantitative measures of both the mass of the combined belief assigned to the emptyset before normalization and the distance between betting commitments of beliefs.We argue that only when both measures are high, it is safe to say the evidence is in conflict. This definition can be served as a prerequisite for selecting appropriate combination rules.

Risk assessment of E-Commerce projects using evidential reasoning

The purpose of this study is to develop a decision making system to evaluate the risks in E-Commerce (EC) projects. Competitive software businesses have the critical task of assessing the risk in the software system development life cycle. This can be conducted on the basis of conventional probabilities, but limited appropriate information is available and so a complete set of probabilities is not available. In such problems, where the analysis is highly subjective and related to vague, incomplete, uncertain or inexact information, the Dempster-Shafer (DS) theory of evidence offers a potential advantage. We use a direct way of reasoning in a single step (i.e., extended DS theory) to develop a decision making system to evaluate the risk in EC projects. This consists of five stages 1) establishing knowledge base and setting rule strengths, 2) collecting evidence and data, 3) determining evidence and rule strength to a mass distribution for each rule; i.e., the first half of a single step reasoning process, 4) combining prior mass and different rules; i.e., the second half of the single step reasoning process, 5) finally, evaluating the belief interval for the best support decision of EC project. We test the system by using potential risk factors associated with EC development and the results indicate that the system is promising way of assisting an EC project manager in identifying potential risk factors and the corresponding project risks.

Stylistics, criticism and mythrepresentation again: squaring the circle with Ray Mackay's subjective solution for all problems

This article is a response to an article by Ray Mackay (1996) which constitutes an attack on stylistic analysis in general, and the writings of the above authors and Ron Carter in particular. Mackay's article (in Language and Communication) accuses stylistics of 'scientificness' and claims that its attempt to provide objective analyses of literary texts is futile.1 We suggest that Mackay has misrepresented what stylisticians have said about objectivity, and that his understanding of objectivity, science and the nature of text-interpretative argument is seriously flawed.

Predicting intentions to purchase organic food: The role of affective and moral attitudes in the Theory of Planned Behaviour

This study examined the usefulness of integrating measures of affective and moral attitudes into the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB)-model in predicting purchase intentions or organic foods. Moral attitude was operationalised Lis positive self-rewarding feelings of doing the right thing. Questionnaire data were gathered in three countries: Italy (N = 202), Finland (N = 270) and UK (N = 200) in March 2004. Questions focussed on intentions to purchase organic apples and organic ready-to-cook pizza instead of their conventional alternatives. Data were analysed using Structural Equation Modelling by simultaneous multi-group analysis of the three Countries. Along with attitudes, moral attitude and subjective norms explained considerable shares of variances in intentions. The relative influences of these variables varied between the Countries, such that in the UK and Italy moral attitude rather than subjective norms had stronger explanatory power. In Finland it was other way around. Inclusion of moral attitude improved the model fit and predictive ability of the model, although only marginally in Finland. Thus the results partially Support the usefulness of incorporating moral measures as well as affective items for attitude into the framework of TPB. (c) 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Measuring conflict and agreement between two prioritized knowledge bases in possibilistic logic.

In this paper we investigate the relationship between two prioritized knowledge bases by measuring both the conflict and the agreement between them.First of all, a quantity of conflict and two quantities of agreement are defined. The former is shown to be a generalization of the well-known Dalal distance which is the hamming distance between two interpretations. The latter are, respectively, a quantity of strong agreement which measures the amount ofinformation on which two belief bases “totally” agree, and a quantity of weak agreement which measures the amount of information that is believed by onesource but is unknown to the other. All three quantity measures are based on the weighted prime implicant, which represents beliefs in a prioritized belief base. We then define a degree of conflict and two degrees of agreement based on our quantity of conflict and quantities of agreement. We also consider the impact of these measures on belief merging and information source ordering.

Acculturation and religion in schools: the views of young people from minority belief backgrounds

This paper aims to explore the relationship between religious identity, acculturation strategies and perceptions of acculturation orientation in the school context amongst young people from minority
belief backgrounds. Based on a qualitative study including interviews with 26 young people from religious minority belief backgrounds in Northern Ireland, it is argued that acculturation theory provides a useful lens for understanding how young people from religious minority belief backgrounds navigate majority religious school contexts. Using a qualitative approach to explore acculturation theory enables an in-depth understanding of the inter-relationship between minority belief youth’s acculturation strategies and their respective school contexts. Similar to previous research, integrationist attitudes generally prevailed amongst minority belief young people in this study. The findings highlight how young people negotiate their religious identities in a complex web of inter-relationships between their minority religious belief community and the mainstream school culture as represented through peer and staff attitudes, school ethos and practices and religious education. Young people demonstrated differentiated understandings of acculturation orientations within the school context, which they evaluated on the basis of complex perceptions of educational policy, interpersonal relationships and individuals’ motivations. Findings are discussed in view of acculturation tensions, which arose particularly in relation to the religious education curriculum and their implications for opt-out provision as stipulated by human rights law.

Computational techniques for a simple theory of conditional preferences

A simple logic of conditional preferences is defined, with a language that allows the compact representation of certain kinds of conditional preference statements, a semantics and a proof theory. CP-nets and TCP-nets can be mapped into this logic, and the semantics and proof theory generalise those of CP-nets and TCP-nets. The system can also express preferences of a lexicographic kind. The paper derives various sufficient conditions for a set of conditional preferences to be consistent, along with algorithmic techniques for checking such conditions and hence confirming consistency. These techniques can also be used for totally ordering outcomes in a way that is consistent with the set of preferences, and they are further developed to give an approach to the problem of constrained optimisation for conditional preferences.

Possibilistic Information Fusion Using Maximal Coherent Subsets

When multiple sources provide information about the same unknown quantity, their fusion into a synthetic interpretable message is often a tedious problem, especially when sources are conicting. In this paper, we propose to use possibility theory and the notion of maximal coherent subsets, often used in logic-based representations, to build a fuzzy belief structure that will be instrumental both for extracting useful information about various features of the information conveyed by the sources and for compressing this information into a unique possibility distribution. Extensions and properties of the basic fusion rule are also studied.

Logic feels so good-I like it! Evidence for intuitive detection of logicality in syllogistic reasoning

When people evaluate syllogisms, their judgments of validity are often biased by the believability of the conclusions of the problems. Thus, it has been suggested that syllogistic reasoning performance is based on an interplay between a conscious and effortful evaluation of logicality and an intuitive appreciation of the believability of the conclusions (e.g., Evans, Newstead, Allen, & Pollard, 1994). However, logic effects in syllogistic reasoning emerge even when participants are unlikely to carry out a full logical analysis of the problems (e.g., Shynkaruk & Thompson, 2006). There is also evidence that people can implicitly detect the conflict between their beliefs and the validity of the problems, even if they are unable to consciously produce a logical response (e.g., De Neys, Moyens, & Vansteenwegen, 2010). In 4 experiments we demonstrate that people intuitively detect the logicality of syllogisms, and this effect emerges independently of participants' conscious mindset and their cognitive capacity. This logic effect is also unrelated to the superficial structure of the problems. Additionally, we provide evidence that the logicality of the syllogisms is detected through slight changes in participants' affective states. In fact, subliminal affective priming had an effect on participants' subjective evaluations of the problems. Finally, when participants misattributed their emotional reactions to background music, this significantly reduced the logic effect.