Rational reasoning or adaptive behavior? Evidence from two-person beauty contest games

Many experiments have shown that human subjects do not necessarily behave in line with game theoretic assumptions and solution concepts. The reasons for this non-conformity are multiple. In this paper we study the argument whether a deviation from game theory is because subjects are rational, but doubt that others are rational as well, compared to the argument that subjects, in general, are boundedly rational themselves. To distinguish these two hypotheses, we study behavior in repeated 2-person and many-person Beauty-Contest-Games which are strategically different from one another. We analyze four different treatments and observe that convergence toward equilibrium is driven by learning through the information about the other player s choice and adaptation rather than self-initiated rational reasoning.

On ignoring scientific evidence: The bumpy road to enlightenment

It is well accepted that people resist evidence that contradicts their beliefs.Moreover, despite their training, many scientists reject results that are inconsistent withtheir theories. This phenomenon is discussed in relation to the field of judgment anddecision making by describing four case studies. These concern findings that clinical judgment is less predictive than actuarial models; simple methods have proven superiorto more theoretically correct methods in times series forecasting; equal weighting ofvariables is often more accurate than using differential weights; and decisions cansometimes be improved by discarding relevant information. All findings relate to theapparently difficult-to-accept idea that simple models can predict complex phenomenabetter than complex ones. It is true that there is a scientific market place for ideas.However, like its economic counterpart, it is subject to inefficiencies (e.g., thinness,asymmetric information, and speculative bubbles). Unfortunately, the market is only correct in the long-run. The road to enlightenment is bumpy.

Grinder's Group Mastery Theory : scientific research and its application to classroom teaching

Estudi centrat en el paper de la comunicació no verbal com a eina docent per a la gestió de l’aula, prenent com a referència el model de comunicació de Michael Grinder (Pentimento), basat en la Programació Neuro-lingüística (PNL). Aquest model s’analitza i es compara amb altres models i estudis sobre la comunicació no verbal, per establir-ne similituds i diferències. Per tal d’avaluar l’eficàcia de les tècniques de gestió de l’aula a través de la comunicació no verbal proposades per Grinder en un context educatiu real, s’inclouen i s’analitzen enregistraments de la implementació de diferents tècniques en un institut de secundària de Catalunya. Tota la informació recollida i analitzada permet valorar i ressaltar com és de significatiu tot allò que s’expressa més enllà del llenguatge, i per tant, com són d’importants i d’útils les habilitats comunicatives d’un professor en la seva tasca d’ensenyar.

Discovery of the faithfulness gene: a model of transmission and transformation of scientific information.

The purpose of this paper is to study the diffusion and transformation of scientific information in everyday discussions. Based on rumour models and social representations theory, the impact of interpersonal communication and pre-existing beliefs on transmission of the content of a scientific discovery was analysed. In three experiments, a communication chain was simulated to investigate how laypeople make sense of a genetic discovery first published in a scientific outlet, then reported in a mainstream newspaper and finally discussed in groups. Study 1 (N=40) demonstrated a transformation of information when the scientific discovery moved along the communication chain. During successive narratives, scientific expert terminology disappeared while scientific information associated with lay terminology persisted. Moreover, the idea of a discovery of a faithfulness gene emerged. Study 2 (N=70) revealed that transmission of the scientific message varied as a function of attitudes towards genetic explanations of behaviour (pro-genetics vs. anti-genetics). Pro-genetics employed more scientific terminology than anti-genetics. Study 3 (N=75) showed that endorsement of genetic explanations was related to descriptive accounts of the scientific information, whereas rejection of genetic explanations was related to evaluative accounts of the information.

Intangible Capital: four years of growth as an open-access scientific publication

Con este nuevo número, la revista Intangible Capital, inicia el cuarto volumen avanzando hacia el quinto año de publicación. Como ya es tradición en la revista, iniciamos este nuevo volumen evaluando el anterior y presentando las nuevas direcciones. Como principales aportaciones del 2007, se destacan hechos relevantes como la renovación de convenios para la indexación científica de la revista, el cambio de plataforma a OJS, la inclusión de un nuevo editor, la nueva composición del editorial board, el equipo de revisores, el cambio a un modelo bilingüe de revista, la nueva financiación obtenida y el trabajo que estamos realizando gran número de editores científicos de acceso abierto en España para el reconocimiento por parte de la Comisión Nacional Evaluadora de la Actividad Investigadora.This issue opens the fourth volume of the Intangible Capital journal, which makes its way towards the fifth year of publication. As usually, we start this volume by evaluating the previous one and tracing new directions. Among the main contributions during the year 2007, we consider important to highlight the following aspects: the renewal of the scientific indexation agreements, the platform change to OJS, the appointment of a new editor, new members included in the editorial board, the board of reviewers, the change towards a bilingual model, the new financing obtained and, the last but not the least, the work undertaken together with many scientific editors of open access Spanish journals for obtaining the positive evaluation of the CNEAI (National Commission for the Evaluation of the Research Activity) and thus, being a proof of scientific excellence

Kitcher's Revolutionary Reasoning Inversion in Ethics

This paper examines three specific issues raised by The Ethical Project. First, I discuss the varieties of altruism and spell out the differences between the definitions proposed by Kitcher and the ways altruism is usually conceived in biology, philosophy, psychology, and economics literature. Second, with the example of Kitcher's account, I take a critical look at evolutionary stories of the emergence of human ethical practices. Third, I point to the revolutionary implications of the Darwinian methodology when it is thoughtfully applied to ethics.

Recherche scientifique en médecine de famille: expériences, barrières et besoins des praticiens [Scientific research in family medicine: practitioners' experience, barriers and needs].

Scientific data from family medicine are relevant for the majority of the population. They are therefore essential from an ethical and public health perspective. We need to promote quality research in family medicine despite methodological, financial and logistic barriers. To highlight the strengths and weaknesses of research in family medicine in the French-speaking part of Switzerland we asked practitioners from this region to share their experience, critics and needs in relation to research. This article summarizes their contribution in light of the international literature.

DOI: The "Big Brother" in the dissemination of scientific documentation

Rapid growth in the availability and use of digital documents has prompted the development of instruments to handle them. A most important example of these instruments are digital identifiers, which provide a codification system that allows digital items, usually up to the level of a computer file, to be singled out and located. Digital identifiers make up standardized global systems applied to specific products or areas. They are part of the very many identifiers developed to handle large numbers of items and large amounts of information for transactional purposes, which often have a global span. Digital identifiers include the ubiquitous Global Trade Item Number (GTIN), a code that unequivocally identifies trade items all around the world. The GTIN can take on several configurations depending on its application. These include: EAN-13, EAN-8, EAN-14, and UCC-12. EAN-13 is the code used for retail products in order to facilitate trade at the point of sale; its widely known symbol or graphical form is the EAN/UPC-13 bar code...

Scientific value of systematic reviews: survey of editors of core clinical journals.

BACKGROUND: Synthesizing research evidence using systematic and rigorous methods has become a key feature of evidence-based medicine and knowledge translation. Systematic reviews (SRs) may or may not include a meta-analysis depending on the suitability of available data. They are often being criticised as 'secondary research' and denied the status of original research. Scientific journals play an important role in the publication process. How they appraise a given type of research influences the status of that research in the scientific community. We investigated the attitudes of editors of core clinical journals towards SRs and their value for publication.¦METHODS: We identified the 118 journals labelled as "core clinical journals" by the National Library of Medicine, USA in April 2009. The journals' editors were surveyed by email in 2009 and asked whether they considered SRs as original research projects; whether they published SRs; and for which section of the journal they would consider a SR manuscript.¦RESULTS: The editors of 65 journals (55%) responded. Most respondents considered SRs to be original research (71%) and almost all journals (93%) published SRs. Several editors regarded the use of Cochrane methodology or a meta-analysis as quality criteria; for some respondents these criteria were premises for the consideration of SRs as original research. Journals placed SRs in various sections such as "Review" or "Feature article". Characterization of non-responding journals showed that about two thirds do publish systematic reviews.¦DISCUSSION: Currently, the editors of most core clinical journals consider SRs original research. Our findings are limited by a non-responder rate of 45%. Individual comments suggest that this is a grey area and attitudes differ widely. A debate about the definition of 'original research' in the context of SRs is warranted.