Jurnal Online STTKD (Sekolah Tinggi Teknologi Kedirgantaraan)
Not a member yet
77141 research outputs found
Sort by
Does providing authors with customized article templates including items from reporting guidelines improve completeness of reporting? A randomized trial
No full textThere is evidence that, although most reputable medical journals endorse the use of reporting guidelines, authors still find it difficult to identify the most appropriate one and use it effectively to improve the completeness of their article.
We have developed an online tool called GoodReports (www.goodreports.org) to help researchers find and use reporting guidelines. The tool currently helps researchers identify the most appropriate single reporting guideline (e.g., CONSORT, STROBE, or PRISMA) and delivers an online, editable checklist that can also be downloaded. The checklist can be annotated to indicate where in the manuscript each item has been reported, then submitted to a journal alongside an article manuscript. However, pilot data collected as part of a collaboration with a medical journal indicated that when a checklist was delivered immediately before submission, it did not lead to authors making significant additions to their manuscript.
Therefore, we plan to
1. Develop the functionality of the GoodReports tool to deliver an article template to be used during writing.
2. Combine items from more than one reporting guideline into a single article template, where appropriate.
3. Conduct a randomized trial to test whether article templates delivered early in the writing process result in more complete reporting of health research articles
ML5: Replication of Albarracin et al., 2008, Study 7
No full textThis is a registration to confirm badges for AMPPS. Includes final manuscript, data, and materials
Productivity and Happiness in Working-from-Home Environment
No full textThe current COVID-19 crisis has forced employees to work from home as much as possible. This
development should be predominantly positive, as research has shown multiple benefits to working from
home such as increased productivity (Bloom et al., 2015) as well as increased happiness and engagement
(Chokshi, 2017). However, in the current situation the expected unanimous positive attitude towards working
from home seems to be fading. Many employees are becoming increasingly less content with their situation,
and are actively requesting a reinstatement of office hours. How can this behavioural inconsistency be
explained? We approach this problem by testing the effect of trust, perceived responsibility, and self-efficacy
as mediators of the positive effect of voluntary home-work agreements. Without the perceived sense of
responsibility and free will, working from home will transform from a liberation to a restriction. We ask to what
extend does a partial versus full working from home condition, and how this perception of happiness and
productivity is compared for experienced and non-experienced homeworkers. Moreover, we investigate the
effect of the circumstance in which workers have to perform (e.g. care for children, degree to which they can
perform their job, lacking social control, lenient KPI’s, external distractions). Second, we investigate whether
people will perceive their wellbeing more positive when they are primed with the benefits of the current
situation. Is homeworking influenced by the subjective perception of being at home, or should employees
prioritise the return of workers to work at the office. Smeets et al. (2020) underlined that spending more time
on liked activities increases happiness more than wealth. Raising awareness of these beneficial conditions
should (at least partially) regress the reported happiness back to the level of happiness when under voluntary
homeworking conditions (based on unemployment research, see Knabe et al., 2010)
Moderators of Relationship between Implicit and Explicit Measures of Evaluation and Identification
No full textThe proposed research will explore how features of the attributes being measured and individual differences affect the relationship between implicit and explicit measures of evaluation and identification. Participants will be visitors to Project Implicit from 2005 to 2007 who completed relevant measures included in the Attitudes, Identities, and Individual Differences dataset (Hussey, Hughes, & Nosek, 2018). The data will include measures of explicit evaluation and identification (i.e., difference scores between self-report items) and implicit evaluation and identification (i.e., the Implicit Association Test; Greenwald, McGhee, & Schwartz, 1998) for 95 target pairs. First, we will attempt to conceptually replicate Nosek’s (2005) findings that self-presentation, distinctiveness, elaboration/importance, and complementarity moderate the relationship between implicit and explicit evaluation across individuals irrespective of attribute targets. Second, we will test whether these same moderators affect the relationship between implicit and explicit identification. Finally, we will explore whether apposite individual difference measures moderate the relationship between implicit and explicit evaluations or identifications. Multilevel Structural Equation Modeling with Full Information Maximum Likelihood estimation will be used in all analyses. Results will reveal how features of attributes, individuals, and experiences influence implicit-explicit relations
Outcome Awareness of Rationalization - Study 4 - Is it motivated?
No full textStudy Name: Rationalization and Outcome Awareness (Study 4)
1) Have any data been collected for this study yet?
No data have been collected yet.
2) Hypothesis: What’s the main question being asked or hypothesis being tested?
When we rationalize a negative state of affairs in the world, how aware are we that we have done this? That is, when we change our beliefs in order to make an unwanted state of affairs in the world more palatable and consistent with our other beliefs and desires, are we aware that we have engaged in this cognitive process, or do we think our new beliefs are the ones we have held all along? We predict that people have little awareness of having engaged in rationalization.
3) Give a brief overview of the methods.
American Prolific Academic workers will begin by reporting their attitudes towards three social issues—one critical issue (the wealth of political leaders) and two filler issues (space exploration and social media). For each issue, all participants will respond to three items measuring attitudes (i.e., 9 items total).
After this, they will read a news article informing them that the typical congressperson is much wealthier than the typical American, that this has been true for at least the past century, and that this state of affairs is unlikely to change.
Following the articles, participants will again report their attitudes about the target issue and the two filler issues, using the same items from the beginning of the study.
Participants will then try to recall their original attitudes on the target issue and on the two filler issues, by reporting how they had responded to each of the items they rated first, prior to the articles. To ensure they try hard to report their most accurate memory, they will learn that good performance on this memory task can earn them extra money.
Participants will then report using explicit items whether and in what direction they changed their attitudes toward each of the topics in response to the news articles.
Finally, participants will complete the System Justification Scale (Kay & Jost, 2003).
4) Variables: We have not divided these into dependent and independent variables, since this study is correlational.
Attitude Variables, including Rationalization: Rationalization will be operationalized as the degree to which attitudes toward political leaders being wealthy become more positive after reading the news articles. Specifically, for each participant, we will calculate their pre-article attitude (mean of items rated prior to reading the news articles), and their post-article attitude (mean of items rated after reading the news articles) toward the target issue. All items will be scored such that agreement with the item indicates more positive attitudes towards wealthy political leaders. That is, all items that represent negative attitudes toward wealthy political leaders will be reverse scored. To capture rationalization, we will compute the difference score scored such that more positive scores mean more rationalization.
Recall Errors: Following the same strategy, we will first calculate participants recalled attitude (mean of the items rated during the memory task). We will then compute the difference between their recalled attitude and their pre-article attitude. On this index, scores greater than 0 mean that participants mis-remembered their initial attitude as being more positive than it actually was; scores below 0 mean that participants mis-remembered their initial attitude as being more negative than their initial attitude.
Perceived Attitude Change: To capture participants’ self-reports of having changed their attitudes for each issue, they will report their level of (dis)agreement with an item that explicitly asked them if reading the news article changed the way they thought about wealthy political leaders, and in what direction it changed their mind if it did.
Individual Differences in System Justification: Individual differences in system justification will be captured by averaging scores on the System Justification Scale.
5) Mediator variables: Describe any variables you expect to mediate the relationship between your IV’s and DV. Specify how they will be measured.
N/A
6) Moderator variables: Describe any variables you expect to moderate the relationship between your IV’s and DV. Specify how they will be measured.
N/A
7) Analyses: Describe what analyses (e.g., t-test, repeated-measures ANOVA) you will use to test your main hypotheses.
We will use three tests to determine if people are aware of how much they rationalized.
First, we will test whether people can accurately self-report the degree to which they have changed their attitudes. To do so, we will test whether participants’ Perceived Attitude Change scores are correlated with their Rationalization scores. A positive correlation would indicate that to some degree, people who rated wealthy political leaders as more positive after reading about their prevalence (as captured by the Rationalization variable) also explicitly reported that they changed their mind to view wealthy political leaders more positively (as captured by the Perceived Attitude Change variable).
Second, we will test whether people’s memory for their initial attitudes are biased by their new, post-article attitudes. To do so, we will conduct a Chi-square test based on two categorical variables: First, based on their Rationalization score, we will label participants as positive changers, negative changers, or non-changers. Second, based on their Recall Error score, we will label participants as positively biased, negatively biased, or unbiased (i.e., perfectly accurate). The chi square will test whether these variables are independent, or contingent on each other such that people who changed their minds in a particular direction tend to be biased in that direction when recalling their prior attitude. (Note: We could also test this relationship by merely examining the correlation between rationalization and recall error; however this test seems too liberal, given that rationalization and recall error will both by necessity be highly negatively correlated with the initial attitude variable)
Third, we will test how much people’s memory for their initial attitudes is linked with their actual initial attitudes, and compare that with how well it is linked with their new, post-article attitudes. To do so, we will use regression to predict recalled attitudes using initial attitudes and post-article attitudes, simultaneously. In this model, accuracy is indexed by the coefficient for initial attitudes, and bias is
indexed by the coefficient for post-article attitudes; we will compare their magnitudes.
8) More analyses. Are there any secondary analyses you plan to conduct? (e.g., order or gender effects).
To ensure that our measure of rationalization is indeed motivated by a desire to justify the system, we will correlate attitude change on the target issue with scores on the System Justification Scale.
9) Sample. Where and from whom will data be collected? How will you decide when to stop collecting data (e.g., target sample size based on power analysis, set amount of time)? If you plan to look at the data using sequential analysis, describe that here.
Participants will be recruited from Prolific Academic. All participants will live in America, have reported to Prolific that they are fluent in English, and have a 95% approval rate for at least 100 jobs on Prolific. Data collection will end when we reach the target sample size of 300 participants after the exclusion criteria below.
10) Exclusion criteria: Who will be excluded (e.g., outliers, participants who fail manipulation check, demographic exclusions)?
Participants will be excluded if they fail to select the correct responses (bolded) for the following questions…
English Language Comprehension Questions: Specifically, if participants fail any one of the following two comprehension questions, they will be automatically taken to the end of the survey, and will not take part in the study.
1. Please select the response choice below that CORRECTLY fills the blank.
What time ____ for the ceremony?
a. will she be leaving
b. she will be leaving
c. she going to be leaving
d. she leaving going to be
2. Which word can CORRECTLY go in the space?
Mrs. Thompson always works _____.
a. wellness
b. fastish
c. carefully
d. upsetly
Other Exclusion Questions: Participants who fail any of these following questions will still complete the full survey.
1. 4. How does the net worth of the average congressperson compare to that of the average American citizen of the same age group?
a. The net worth of the average congressperson is 3 times more than that of the average American their same age.
b. The net worth of the average congressperson is 4 times more than that of the average American their same age.
c. The net worth of the average congressperson is twice as much as that of the average American their same age.
d. The net worth of the average congressperson is the same as that of the average American their same age.
2. Research in decision making shows that people, when making decisions and answering
questions, prefer not to pay attention and minimize their effort as much as possible. Some studies show that over 50% of people don't carefully read questions. If you are reading this question and have read all the other questions, please select the box marked 'other' and type 'awareness'. Do not select "social issues". Thank you for participating and for taking the time to read through the questions carefully!
What was this study about?
a. Social Issues
b. News
c. Memory
d. Other (please specify) ____________ (Correct = awareness)
3. During the study, did you believe that the news articles you read were real? It is
extremely important for our study that you be both accurate and honest.
a. Yes
b. No
Pre-registration written by (initials): WJ
Pre-registration reviewed by (initials): K
RANCANG BANGUN ALAT MONITORING KUALITAS UDARA DIAREA PENGOLAHAN LIMBAH RUMAH SAKIT
Get PDFDecreased air quality caused by air pollution can cause respiratory problems if inhaled for a long period of time. The absence of air quality monitoring equipment in the waste management area means that workers do not know the level of air pollution that occurs in the hospital area. This research aims to create an Air Quality monitoring system in the Hospital Waste Processing Area. The air that will be monitored is Methane, CO, Alcohol and NH4. Data on temperature, humidity, methane gas, alcohol gas, CO gas and NH3 gas are sent via ESP32 to the smartphone and sent directly to Google Sheet in real time, so that data acquisition from this tool is stored properly. Indoor measurements showed that Methane Gas showed an average of 40.9 ppm, then around the IPALL area Methane Gas rose to 81.0, this was because methane gas around the IPALL area had increased. Indoor measurements show that CO gas shows an average of 3 ppm, then around the IPALL area, CO gas increases to 165 ppm, this is because CO gas around the IPALL area has increased. Indoor measurements show that Alcohol Gas shows an average of 1 ppm, then around the IPALL area Alcohol Gas increases to 969 ppm, this is because Alcohol gas around the IPALL area has increased. Indoor measurements show that NH4 gas shows an average of 4 ppm, then around the IPALL area Methane Gas increases to 986 ppm, this is because methane gas around the IPALL area has increase
On Newtonian knot in empty (2+1)-dimensional space-time
No full textWe propose the existence of a topological object, a Newtonian knot, in the framework of an Abelian Chern-Simons gravity with a small positive cosmological constant in empty (2+1)-dimensional space-time. This proposal is based on the idea that the Ricci curvature tensor could consist of a set of curvature components satisfying the non-trivial Hopf maps, leading to topological structures. Working within the Abelian Chern-Simons (first-order) framework, where the dreibein and spin connection are treated as independent fields, we derive the corresponding field equations and present ansatz solutions for both. Our results suggest that the Newtonian knot may serve as a novel topological feature in low-dimensional gravity theories
The Gendered Persistence of Authoritarian Indoctrination
No full textA large literature has studied the effects of socialization under authoritarianism on political attitudes. In this research note, we extend this literature by demonstrating striking gender disparities in the post-transition persistence of these effects. We study the case of authoritarian indoctrination in the German Democratic Republic (GDR) using a regression kink design for causal identification. First, we draw on a unique survey fielded right before reunification to show that education under authoritarianism substantially reduced support for democratic capitalism and reunification with the West. In the second step, we triangulate multiple contemporary data sources to trace the persistence of these effects over time. Three decades after the fall of the GDR, the attitudinal effects of authoritarian indoctrination persist only among men, but not women. Our results highlight considerable heterogeneity in the persistence of authoritarian legacies, raising critical questions about post-authoritarian "re-socialization" and gendered adaptability
Simpson's Gender-Equality Paradox
No full textSeveral cross-country examinations have found larger gender differences in Western countries. More recently, it has been argued, from an evolutionary standpoint, that equality may paradoxically increase gender differences, because it provides more freedom for men and women to pursue innate preferences. However, this paradox has primarily been examined with this cross-country methodology, opening up for other cultural differences to drive the results. For instance, measures developed in Protestant and Germanic-speaking countries, may not work the same in other cultural clusters of countries, and may not have the same statistical qualities there (e.g., in terms of reliability). Here, we reanalyze the results from multiple studies on the gender-equality paradox with country-level data available. We find that gender differences co-vary more strongly with cultural regions and data quality than gender equality, and that any variable higher in the West appears to achieve similar correlations as gender equality. Also, controlling for cultural regions consistently and strongly attenuates the association with gender equality, including to become statistically non-significant, or to switch direction. In other words, the baseline associations differ between and within cultural clusters (a Simpson’s paradox), suggesting there is no simple causal relation between gender equality and expressed gender differences. Similarly, controlling for data quality indicators strongly attenuates the paradox. Finally, we show that, with and without controls, there is no consistent paradoxical association across many of the largest cross-cultural studies on gender differences, including newly analyzed data. The same is true for other country development variables considered in the gender-equality paradox literature
The Experience-Outcome Model of Honest Conversation: A Theory of Difficult Conversations Across Situations, People, and Time
No full textIn this work, we introduce the Experience-Outcome Model of honest conversation. Our model advances three key ideas. First, a communicator’s decision to initiate a conversation is influenced by their expected experience during a conversation, in addition to the expected outcomes following the conversation. Second, these same factors influence a communicator’s decision to speak truthfully within a conversation, conditional on initiation. Third, when communicators expect the experience of a conversation to be negative but the outcomes of a conversation to be positive, this leads to self-regulatory conflict. After introducing the Experience-Outcome Model, we explain its implications for difficult conversations—conversations that are aversive because they can cause interpersonal harm. The Experience-Outcome Model explains why communicators fail to initiate difficult conversations and why they communicate dishonestly within them, even when communicators expect the conversations to lead to positive outcomes: The negative experience associated with harm aversion creates self-regulatory conflict. Drawing from the literature on self-regulation, we develop six key propositions that explain how psychological distance influences the experience of harm aversion within difficult conversations and, therefore, a communicator’s likelihood of overcoming this conflict. Our model deepens the current understanding of the psychological dynamics underlying honesty and social engagement. By applying the Experience-Outcome Model to difficult conversations, we provide insight into the psychology of self-regulation and everyday harm as well as provide practical guidance on managing, mentoring, and promoting others’ growth