The effective Planck mass and the scale of inflation

Observable quantities in cosmology are dimensionless, and therefore independent of the units in which they are measured. This is true of all physical quantities associated with the primordial perturbations that source cosmic microwave background anisotropies such as their amplitude and spectral properties. However, if one were to try and infer an absolute energy scale for inflation—a priori, one of the more immediate corollaries of detecting primordial tensor modes—one necessarily makes reference to a particular choice of units, the natural choice for which is Planck units. In this note, we discuss various aspects of how inferring the energy scale of inflation is complicated by the fact that the effective strength of gravity as seen by inflationary quanta necessarily differs from that seen by gravitational experiments at presently accessible scales. The uncertainty in the former relative to the latter has to do with the unknown spectrum of universally coupled particles between laboratory scales and the putative scale of inflation. These intermediate particles could be in hidden as well as visible sectors or could also be associated with Kaluza–Klein resonances associated with a compactification scale below the scale of inflation. We discuss various implications for cosmological observables.

Controlling for culture-specific response bias using ipsatization and response style indicators: Family orientation in seventeen cultures and two generations

Within-subject standardization (ipsatization) has been advocated as a possible means to control for culture-specific responding (e.g., Fisher, 2004). However, the consequences of different kinds of ipsatization procedures for the interpretation of mean differences remain unclear. The current study compared several ipsatization procedures with ANCOVA-style procedures using response style indicators for the construct of family orientation with data from 14 cultures and two generations from the Value-of-Children-(VOC)-Study (4135 dyads). Results showed that within-subject centering/standardizing across all Likert-scale items of the comprehensive VOC-questionnaire removed most of the original cross-cultural variation in family orientation and lead to a non-interpretable pattern of means in both generations. Within-subject centering/standardizing using a subset of 19 unrelated items lead to a decrease to about half of the original effect size and produced a theoretically meaningful pattern of means. A similar effect size and similar mean differences were obtained when using a measure of acquiescent responding based on the same set of items in an ANCOVA-style analysis. Additional models controlling for extremity and modesty performed worse, and combinations did not differ from the acquiescence-only model. The usefulness of different approaches to control for uniform response styles (scalar equivalence not given) in cross- cultural comparisons is discussed.

Neuroanatomy of intergroup bias: A white matter microstructure study of individual differences

Intergroup bias - the tendency to behave more positively towards an ingroup member than an outgroup member - is a powerful social force, for good and ill. And though it is widely demonstrated, intergroup bias is not universal, as it is characterized by significant individual differences. Recently, attention has begun to turn to whether neuroanatomy might explain these individual differences in intergroup bias. However, no research to date has examined whether white matter microstructure could help determine differences in behavior towards ingroup and outgroup members. In the current research, we examine intergroup bias with the third-party punishment paradigm and white matter integrity and connectivity strength as determined by diffusion tensor imaging (DTI). We found that both increased white matter integrity at the right temporal-parietal junction (TPJ) and connectivity strength between the right TPJ and the dorsomedial prefrontal cortex (DMPFC) were associated with increased impartiality in the third-party punishment paradigm, i.e., reduced intergroup bias. Further, consistent with the role that these brain regions play in the mentalizing network, we found that these effects were mediated by mentalizing processes. Participants with greater white matter integrity at the right TPJ and connectivity strength between the right TPJ and the DMPFC employed mentalizing processes more equally for ingroup and outgroup members, and this non-biased use of mentalizing was associated with increased impartiality. The current results help shed light on the mechanisms of bias and, potentially, on interventions that promote impartiality over intergroup bias.

Hindsight bias in gustatory judgments

Being in hindsight, people tend to overestimate what they had known in foresight. This phenomenon has been studied for a wide variety of knowledge domains (e.g., episodes with uncertain outcomes, or solutions to almanac questions). As a result of these studies, hindsight bias turned out to be a robust phenomenon. In this paper, we present two experiments that successfully extended the domain of hindsight bias to gustatory judgments. Participants tasted different food items and were asked to estimate the quantity of a certain ingredient, for example, the residual sugar in a white wine. Judgments in both experiments were systematically biased towards previously presented low or high values that were labeled as the true quantities. Thus, hindsight bias can be considered a phenomenon that extends well beyond the judgment domains studied so far.

Denying the foreseeability of an event as a means of self-protection. The Impact of Self-Threatening Outcome Information on the Strength of the Hindsight Bias

The hindsight bias represents the tendency of people to falsely believe that they would have predicted the outcome of an event, once the outcome is known. Two experiments will be presented that show a reduction or even reversal of the hindsight bias when the outcome information is self-threatening for the participants. Participants read a report of an interaction between a man and a woman that ended with different outcomes: The woman was raped vs. the woman was not raped vs. no outcome information was given. Results of the first experiment indicated that especially female participants, who did not accept rape myths, showed a reversed hindsight bias, when they received the rape outcome information. The more threatening the rape outcome had been, the lower was their estimated likelihood of rape. Results of the second experiment confirmed those of the first. Female participants, who did not accept rape myths and perceived themselves highly similar to the victim, showed a strong reversed hindsight bias, when threatened by the rape outcome, whereas female participants, who did believe in rape myth and were not similar to the victim, showed a classical hindsight bias. These effects were interpreted in terms of self-serving or in-group serving functions of the hindsight bias: Participants deny the foreseeability of a self-threatening outcome as a means of self-protection even if they are not personally affected by the negative information, but a member of their group.

Exculpating victims and the reversal of hindsight bias

This experiment examines the role of the hindsight bias and of motivational forces such as the motive to believe in a just world as possible causes of the derogation of victims effect in the context of rape. The hindsight bias is the tendency of people to falsely believe that they would have predicted the outcome of an event once the outcome is known. Participants read descriptions of an interaction between a man and a woman that ended with one of four possible outcomes: The woman was raped with very severe consequences for her future life vs. rape with only minor consequences for her future life vs. no rape (assailant was forced to retreat by the strong defense of the victim) vs. no outcome information. To test motivational predictions the hindsight bias and the derogation effect were analyzed as a consequence of the sex of participants, the seriousness of the consequences of the rape, the belief in a just world and the acceptance of rape myths. Results supported the assumption that derogation effects are at least partly driven by hindsight bias and that motivational processes work via the hindsight bias. However, in this study we did not find a classical hindsight bias but a reversed hindsight bias: Especially female participants in the severe consequences of rape condition and those participants who did not accept rape myths rated the likelihood of rape in the rape outcome condition as smaller than participants in the no outcome information control group. They also derogated the victim less than participants in the no information control group. These effects were interpreted in terms of self-serving or in-group serving functions of the hindsight bias. Finally no support was found for the assumption that derogation effects are driven by the motive to believe in a just world.

Prior knowledge of the clinical picture does not introduce bias in the histopathologic diagnosis of melanocytic skin lesions

A common debate among dermatopathologists is that prior knowledge of the clinical picture of melanocytic skin neoplasms may introduce a potential bias in the histopathologic examination. Histologic slides from 99 melanocytic skin neoplasms were circulated among 10 clinical dermatologists, all of them formally trained and board-certified dermatopathologists: 5 dermatopathologists had clinical images available after a 'blind' examination (Group 1); the other 5 had clinical images available before microscopic examination (Group 2). Data from the two groups were compared regarding 'consensus' (a diagnosis in agreement by ≥4 dermatopathologists/group), chance-corrected interobserver agreement (Fleiss' k) and level of diagnostic confidence (LDC: a 1-5 arbitrary scale indicating 'increasing reliability' of any given diagnosis). Compared with Group 1 dermatopathologists, Group 2 achieved a lower number of consensus (84 vs. 90) but a higher k value (0.74 vs. 0.69) and a greater mean LDC value (4.57 vs. 4.32). The same consensus was achieved by the two groups in 81/99 cases. Spitzoid neoplasms were most frequently controversial for both groups. The histopathologic interpretation of melanocytic neoplasms seems to be not biased by the knowledge of the clinical picture before histopathologic examination.

An Assessment of the Risk of Bias in Randomized Controlled Trial Reports Published in Prosthodontic and Implant Dentistry Journals

PURPOSE The objective of this study was to assess the risk of bias of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in prosthodontic and implant dentistry journals. MATERIALS AND METHODS The last 30 issues of 9 journals in the field of prosthodontic and implant dentistry (Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research, Clinical Oral Implants Research, Implant Dentistry, International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants, International Journal of Periodontics and Restorative Dentistry, International Journal of Prosthodontics, Journal of Dentistry, Journal of Oral Rehabilitation, and Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry) were hand-searched for RCTs. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool and analyzed descriptively. RESULTS From the 3,667 articles screened, a total of 147 RCTs were identified and included. The number of published RCTs increased with time. The overall distribution of a high risk of bias assessment varied across the domains of the Cochrane risk of bias tool: 8% for random sequence generation, 18% for allocation concealment, 41% for masking, 47% for blinding of outcome assessment, 7% for incomplete outcome data, 12% for selective reporting, and 41% for other biases. CONCLUSION The distribution of high risk of bias for RCTs published in the selected prosthodontic and implant dentistry journals varied among journals and ranged from 8% to 47%, which can be considered as substantial.

Internet-based interpretation bias modification for social anxiety: A pilot study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The biased interpretation of ambiguous social situations is considered a maintaining factor of Social Anxiety Disorder (SAD). Studies on the modification of interpretation bias have shown promising results in laboratory settings. The present study aims at pilot-testing an Internet-based training that targets interpretation and judgmental bias. METHOD: Thirty-nine individuals meeting diagnostic criteria for SAD participated in an 8-week, unguided program. Participants were presented with ambiguous social situations, were asked to choose between neutral, positive, and negative interpretations, and were required to evaluate costs of potential negative outcomes. Participants received elaborate automated feedback on their interpretations and judgments. RESULTS: There was a pre-to-post-reduction of the targeted cognitive processing biases (d = 0.57-0.77) and of social anxiety symptoms (d = 0.87). Furthermore, results showed changes in depression and general psychopathology (d = 0.47-0.75). Decreases in cognitive biases and symptom changes did not correlate. The results held stable accounting for drop-outs (26%) and over a 6-week follow-up period. Forty-five percent of the completer sample showed clinical significant change and almost half of the participants (48%) no longer met diagnostic criteria for SAD. LIMITATIONS: As the study lacks a control group, results lend only preliminary support to the efficacy of the intervention. Furthermore, the mechanism of change remained unclear. CONCLUSION: First results promise a beneficial effect of the program for SAD patients. The treatment proved to be feasible and acceptable. Future research should evaluate the intervention in a randomized-controlled setting.

A Validation Study on Voter Turnout Bias in Switzerland

Surveys on voting behavior typically overestimate turnout rates substantially. To disentangle different sources of bias - coverage error, nonresponse bias, and overreporting - we conducted a validation study in which respondents' self-reported voting behavior was compared to administrative voting records (N = 2000). Our results show that all three sources of error inflate the survey estimate of the turnout rate and also bias estimates from political participation models, although coverage error is only moderate compared to the more pronounced biases due to nonresponse and overreporting. Furthermore, results from a wording experiment do not provide evidence that revised wording reduces measurement bias.