The underestimation of compliance to direct help requests explained by adaptive sampling

Helping behavior is any intentional behavior that benefits another living being or group (Hogg & Vaughan, 2010). People tend to underestimate the probability that others will comply with their direct requests for help (Flynn & Lake, 2008). This implies that when they need help, they will assess the probability of getting it (De Paulo, 1982, cited in Flynn & Lake, 2008) and then they will tend to estimate one that is actually lower than the real chance, so they may not even consider worth asking for it. Existing explanations for this phenomenon attribute it to a mistaken cost computation by the help seeker, who will emphasize the instrumental cost of “saying yes”, ignoring that the potential helper also needs to take into account the social cost of saying “no”. And the truth is that, especially in face-to-face interactions, the discomfort caused by refusing to help can be very high. In short, help seekers tend to fail to realize that it might be more costly to refuse to comply with a help request rather than accepting. A similar effect has been observed when estimating trustworthiness of people. Fetchenhauer and Dunning (2010) showed that people also tend to underestimate it. This bias is reduced when, instead of asymmetric feedback (getting feedback only when deciding to trust the other person), symmetric feedback (always given) was provided. This cause could as well be applicable to help seeking as people only receive feedback when they actually make their request but not otherwise. Fazio, Shook, and Eiser (2004) studied something that could be reinforcing these outcomes: Learning asymmetries. By means of a computer game called BeanFest, they showed that people learn better about negatively valenced objects (beans in this case) than about positively valenced ones. This learning asymmetry esteemed from “information gain being contingent on approach behavior” (p. 293), which could be identified with what Fetchenhauer and Dunning mention as ‘asymmetric feedback’, and hence also with help requests. Fazio et al. also found a generalization asymmetry in favor of negative attitudes versus positive ones. They attributed it to a negativity bias that “weights resemblance to a known negative more heavily than resemblance to a positive” (p. 300). Applied to help seeking scenarios, this would mean that when facing an unknown situation, people would tend to generalize and infer that is more likely that they get a negative rather than a positive outcome from it, so, along with what it was said before, people will be more inclined to think that they will get a “no” when requesting help. Denrell and Le Mens (2011) present a different perspective when trying to explain judgment biases in general. They deviate from the classical inappropriate information processing (depicted among other by Fiske & Taylor, 2007, and Tversky & Kahneman, 1974) and explain this in terms of ‘adaptive sampling’. Adaptive sampling is a sampling mechanism in which the selection of sample items is conditioned by the values of the variable of interest previously observed (Thompson, 2011). Sampling adaptively allows individuals to safeguard themselves from experiences they went through once and turned out to lay negative outcomes. However, it also prevents them from giving a second chance to those experiences to get an updated outcome that could maybe turn into a positive one, a more positive one, or just one that regresses to the mean, whatever direction that implies. That, as Denrell and Le Mens (2011) explained, makes sense: If you go to a restaurant, and you did not like the food, you do not choose that restaurant again. This is what we think could be happening when asking for help: When we get a “no”, we stop asking. And here, we want to provide a complementary explanation for the underestimation of the probability that others comply with our direct help requests based on adaptive sampling. First, we will develop and explain a model that represents the theory. Later on, we will test it empirically by means of experiments, and will elaborate on the analysis of its results.

eggNOG v4.0: nested orthology inference across 3686 organisms

With the increasing availability of various 'omics data, high-quality orthology assignment is crucial for evolutionary and functional genomics studies. We here present the fourth version of the eggNOG database (available at http://eggnog.embl.de) that derives nonsupervised orthologous groups (NOGs) from complete genomes, and then applies a comprehensive characterization and analysis pipeline to the resulting gene families. Compared with the previous version, we have more than tripled the underlying species set to cover 3686 organisms, keeping track with genome project completions while prioritizing the inclusion of high-quality genomes to minimize error propagation from incomplete proteome sets. Major technological advances include (i) a robust and scalable procedure for the identification and inclusion of high-quality genomes, (ii) provision of orthologous groups for 107 different taxonomic levels compared with 41 in eggNOGv3, (iii) identification and annotation of particularly closely related orthologous groups, facilitating analysis of related gene families, (iv) improvements of the clustering and functional annotation approach, (v) adoption of a revised tree building procedure based on the multiple alignments generated during the process and (vi) implementation of quality control procedures throughout the entire pipeline. As in previous versions, eggNOGv4 provides multiple sequence alignments and maximum-likelihood trees, as well as broad functional annotation. Users can access the complete database of orthologous groups via a web interface, as well as through bulk download.

Socially anxious and confident men interact with a forward virtual woman: an experiment study

Male volunteers entered an immersive virtual reality that depicted a party, where they were approached by a lone virtual woman who initiated a conversation. The goal was to study how socially anxious and socially confident men would react to this event. Interest focused on whether the socially anxious participants would exhibit sustained anxiety during the conversation or whether this would diminish over time, and differ from the responses of the more socially confident men.

Net Neutrality: Measuring the Problem, Assessing the Legal Risks

Network neutrality is a growing policy controversy. Traffic management techniques affect not only high-speed, high-money content, but by extension all other content too. Internet regulators and users may tolerate much more discrimination in the interests of innovation. For instance, in the absence of regulatory oversight, ISPs could use Deep Packet Inspection (DPI) to block some content altogether, if they decide it is not to the benefit of ISPs, copyright holders, parents or the government. ISP blocking is currently widespread in controlling spam email, and in some countries in blocking sexually graphic illegal images. In 1999 this led to scrutiny of foreclosure of Instant Messaging and video and cable-telephony horizontal merger. Fourteen years later, there were in 2013 net neutrality laws implemented in Slovenia, the Netherlands, Chile and Finland, regulation in the United States and Canada , co-regulation in Norway, and self-regulation in Japan, the United Kingdom and many other European countries . Both Germany and France in mid-2013 debated new net neutrality legislation, and the European Commission announced on 11 September 2013 that it would aim to introduce legislation in early 2014. This paper analyses these legal developments, and in particular the difficulty in assessing reasonable traffic management and ‘specialized’ (i.e. unregulated) faster services in both EU and US law. It also assesses net neutrality law against the international legal norms for user privacy and freedom of expression