Biased group decision-making and the effect of computer-mediated communication: separating the effects of anonymity, voting and blind picking

The influence of communication technology on group decision-making has been examined in many studies. But the findings are inconsistent. Some studies showed a positive effect on decision quality, other studies have shown that communication technology makes the decision even worse. One possible explanation for these different findings could be the use of different Group Decision Support Systems (GDSS) in these studies, with some GDSS better fitting to the given task than others and with different sets of functions. This paper outlines an approach with an information system solely designed to examine the effect of (1) anonymity, (2) voting and (3) blind picking on decision quality, discussion quality and perceived quality of information.

Psychological processes and histories associated with nonepileptic versus epileptic seizure presentations

Nonepileptic seizures (NES) provide a clinical challenge as the mechanisms involved remain uncertain. The present study compares 27 participants with confirmed NES presentations with 39 individuals with epileptic seizure (ES) presentations only, on indices of psychopathology, trauma history, dissociative propensity, and attachment style. Psychopathology and dissociation were found to be significantly elevated in the NES group compared with the ES group. No differences were found between groups in terms of trauma history and attachment style. However, trauma history did correlate significantly with psychopathology in the NES group but not in the ES group. Finally, whereas the relationship between psychological variables and seizure frequency was weak within the ES group, trauma history, a fearful attachment dimension, psychopathology, and dissociation predicted seizure frequency in the NES group. Implications for understanding and interventions with NES presentations are discussed.

COMP1205 Student Presentations A-D

Tuesday 6th May Building 34 room 3001, 16.15-18.00 Presenting: Groups: A, B, C, D Marking Groups: E, F, G, H 16.20 Group A: The online workplace: virtuality 16.40 Group B: Open innovation and novel business practices 17.00Group C: Banter, jokes, freedom of speech and defamation 17.20 Group D: Security and privacy – legal overview

COMP1205 Student Presentations I-L

Thursday 8th May Building 6 (Eustace) Room 1007, 15.00-16.40 Su & Elena Presenting: Groups: I, J, K, L Marking Groups: M, N, O, P Schedule and Topics 15.00-15.05: Introduction and protocol for the session 15.05-15.25 Group I: Sustainablity – responsiblities and legislation 15.25-15.45 Group J: Green IT – solutions and benefits 16.45-16.05 Group K: Open and linked data 16.05-16.25 Group L: What is Web Science? 16.25-16.45: Wash-up: feedback session for presentation groups

COMP1205 Student Presentations E-H

Monday 12th May Building 34 Room 3001, 12.00-13.45 Su & Rikki Presenting: Groups: E, F, G, H Marking Groups: I, J, K, L Schedule and Topics 12.00-12.05: Introduction and protocol for the session 12.05-12.25 Group E: Creative commons, open source, open movements 12.25-12.45 Group F: Trolling, Banter, Cyber Hate, Online Bullying 12.45-13.05 Group G: Personal Privacy and Security 13.05-13.25 Group H: Crime online; cyber security 13.25-13.45: Wash-up: feedback session for presentation groups

COMP1205 Student Presentations M-P

Tuesday 13th May Building 34 Room 3001, 16.15-17.45 Elena & Rikki/Jian Presenting: Groups: M, N, O, P Marking Groups: Q, R, S, T Schedule and Topics 16.15-16.20: Introduction and protocol for the session 16.20 Group M: Serious games – gaming as a driver for applications online 16.40 Group N: Open Education OERs 17.00 Group O: Big Data – the big picture 17.20 Group P: Rights and equality in the workplace 17.40-18.00: Wash-up: feedback session for presentation groups

COMP1205 Student Presentations Q-T

Monday 12th May Building 34 Room 3001, 10.00-12.45 Su & Rikki Presenting: Groups: Q, R, S, T Marking Groups: U, V, W, X Schedule and Topics 10.00-10.05: Introduction and protocol for the session 10.05-10.25 Group Q: Disablitites and rights – legal responsibilities 10.25-10.45 Group R: Computer Ethics, Professional bodies and accreditation 10.45-11.05 Group S: Digital divide 11.05-11.25 Group T: How the web is chaning the world: co-operation, co-creation, crowd funding and crowd sourcing 11.25-11.45: Wash-up: feedback session for presentation groups

COMP1205 Student Presentations U-X

Thursday 15th May Building 02A Room 2077, 15.00-16.45 Elena & Rikki Presenting: Groups: U, V, W, X Marking Groups: A, B, C, D Schedule and Topics 15.00-15.05: Introduction and protocol for the session 15.05-15.25 Group U: Digital Literacies 15.25-15.45 Group V: Will MOOCs destroy face-to-face University Education? 15.45-16.05 Group W: Groupwork and leadership skills in MMORPGs 16.05-16.25 Group X: Tools and techniques for agile project management 16.25-16.45: Wash-up: feedback session for presentation groups

Oral Communication and Presentations in Mathematics

In this action research study of my classroom of eighth grade mathematics, I investigated the attitudes of students toward mathematics along with their achievement levels with the use of oral presentations in my Algebra class. During the second semester the class was divided into groups of two for each presentation, changing partners each time. Every other week each group was given a math problem that required more work than a normal homework type problem. On the last day of that week the students gave a short presentation on their problem. I discovered that while there was no significant evidence that student achievement increased, the students did enjoy the different aspect of presentations in a math class. I plan to implement presentations in my classroom more often with the intent to increase student enjoyment.

A report of a national mutation testing service for the MEN1 gene: clinical presentations and implications for mutation testing

Introduction: Mutation testing for the MEN1 gene is a useful method to diagnose and predict individuals who either have or will develop multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 ( MEN 1). Clinical selection criteria to identify patients who should be tested are needed, as mutation analysis is costly and time consuming. This study is a report of an Australian national mutation testing service for the MEN1 gene from referred patients with classical MEN 1 and various MEN 1- like conditions. Results: All 55 MEN1 mutation positive patients had a family history of hyperparathyroidism, had hyperparathyroidism with one other MEN1 related tumour, or had hyperparathyroidism with multiglandular hyperplasia at a young age. We found 42 separate mutations and six recurring mutations from unrelated families, and evidence for a founder effect in five families with the same mutation. Discussion: Our results indicate that mutations in genes other than MEN1 may cause familial isolated hyperparathyroidism and familial isolated pituitary tumours. Conclusions: We therefore suggest that routine germline MEN1 mutation testing of all cases of classical'' MEN1, familial hyperparathyroidism, and sporadic hyperparathyroidism with one other MEN1 related condition is justified by national testing services. We do not recommend routine sequencing of the promoter region between nucleotides 1234 and 1758 ( Genbank accession no. U93237) as we could not detect any sequence variations within this region in any familial or sporadic cases of MEN1 related conditions lacking a MEN1 mutation. We also suggest that testing be considered for patients < 30 years old with sporadic hyperparathyroidism and multigland hyperplasia

Self-cutting and prospective repetition of self-harm: studies of emergency department presentations in Ireland

Background Self-harm places an individual at increased risk of future self-harm and suicide, and indicates distress and maladaptive coping. Those who present to hospital with self-cutting form a significant minority of self-harm patients who are at increased risk of prospective repetition of self-harm and suicide compared with those presenting with intentional overdose. In addition to increased risk, there is emerging evidence of demographic, psychological, clinical, and social differences between those presenting with self-cutting and those presenting with overdose. Aim and Key Objectives The aim of the current doctoral work was to examine in detail the association between presenting with self-cutting and risk of prospective repetition. The objectives were: to identify evidence-based risk factors for repetition of self-harm among those presenting to emergency departments with self-harm; to compare demographic and presentation characteristics and prospective repetition across presentations of self-cutting only, self-cutting plus intentional overdose, and intentional overdose only; to compare prospective repetition and other characteristics within self-cutting presentations based on the type of treatment received; to compare self-cutting and intentional overdose patients on psychological risk and protective factors for repetition; and to examine the lived experience of engaging in repeated overdose and self-cutting. Methods The current doctoral work used a mixed-methods approach and is comprised of one systematic review and four empirical studies. The empirical studies were two registry-based prospective studies of Irish hospital presentations of self-harm, one prospective structured interview study, and one qualitative study using Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis. Results The systematic review identified several consistent and emerging risk factors for repetition of self-harm, compared to which self-cutting had a medium-sized effect. The registry studies demonstrated that the involvement of self-cutting, particularly less medically severe selfcutting, confers an increased risk of 1-month and 12-month repetition among Irish index selfharm presentations. The structured psychological study detected higher hopelessness and lower non-reactivity to inner experience among those presenting with self-cutting, and higher depression among those who repeated self-harm. Repeaters had lower baseline levels of protective psychological factors than non-repeaters and continued to have higher depression and hopelessness at follow-up. Finally, the qualitative study indicated that self-harm is a purposeful action taken in response to an overwhelming situation and is evaluated afterwards in terms of personal and social effects. Chosen method of self-harm seemed to be influenced by the desired outcome of the self-harm act, capability, accessibility and previous experience. Conclusion Despite limitations in terms of recruitment rates, the work presented in this thesis is innovative in examining the issue of the association between self-cutting and repetition from multiple perspectives. No one factor can reliably predict all repetition but self-cutting represents one consistent and easily detected risk factor for repetition. Those who present with self-cutting exhibit significant differences on demographic, clinical, and psychological variables compared with those presenting with intentional overdose, and seem to exhibit a more vulnerable profile. However, those who present with self-cutting do not form a discrete or homogenous group, and self-harm methods and levels of suicidal intent are liable to fluctuate over time.

Report of the Working Group on Introductions and Transfers of Marine Organisms (WGITMO). 16-18 March 2016 Olbia, Italy

The 42th meeting of the ICES Working Group on Introductions and Transfers of Marine Organisms (WGITMO) was held in Olbia, Italy, 16–18 March 2016, with Anna Occhipinti-Ambrogi as host and Henn Ojaveer as chairperson. Representatives from 19 countries participated in the meeting. Attendants were from Belgium, Canada, Dennark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Lithuania, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Russia, Spain, Sweden, United Kingdom and United States. Sweden contributed by cor-respondence. The objectives of the meeting were to update information and discuss several aspects related to the introductions and transfers of non-indigenous aquatic species. Data and information management were two of the discussion topics of the meeting, with special focus on the better exploitation of the ‘Information system on aquatic non-indigenous and cryptogenic species’ (AquaNIS). The WGITMO also dedicated time for addressing the MSFD D2 issues: indicator on new non-indigenous species introduced by human activities, and opportunities and problems related to cross-regional comparison of non-indigenous species indicators. Preparation of the manuscript of the alert report on sea squirt Didemnum vexillum, which is to be published in ICES CRR series, was discussed and the steps to be taken to finalise the report were agreed. As usual, adequate time was devoted to discuss national reports, to exchange of information on the management of NIS and to review ongoing and planned research activities. The approach taken during the meeting facilitated presentations and discussions on the issues of relevance related to the Terms of References as well as on a few generic and strategically-important issues of general relevance to bioinvasions. The meeting began with a full-day joint meeting with the Working Group on Ballast and Other Ship Vectors (WGBOSV), which provided an opportunity to discuss and address issues of common interest, such as shipping and biofouling as introduction vectors. The proposed ICES demonstration advice on ‘Risk management of non-indigenous species associated with shipping in the Arctic’ was discussed, and edits were suggested for both the orientation of the demonstration advice as well as for the exact questions to be asked. Both working groups agreed that the practice of conducting back-to-back meetings with one joint day is useful and will continue in 2017. All Terms of References to be addressed for 2016 were discussed. For some Terms of Ref-erence, more detailed presentations were given, and a short overview of the information and subsequent discussion is provided herein at the end of each section. This report is structured so that each Term of Reference is dealt with in sequential order. The main body of the report contains summaries of the presentations and discussions with the more detailed documents being contained in the Annexes. WGITMO progressed each of the Terms of Reference by either completing the task or clearly identifying and agreeing on the inter-sessional activities required to still finalise the work in 2016. From 2017, WGITMO will be shifted to multi-annual management.