1,720,980 research outputs found
Genetic attributions and gender differences the effect of scientific theories and evaluations of sexual behaviors
Much scientific and media attention has been devoted to the growing body of research into the genetic correlates of human phenomena. However, many of the resulting reports lead to a deterministic interpretation of the role of genes, and involve fundamental misunderstandings of genetics and heredity. Hence, questions arise regarding the ways in which people make sense of the behavioural genetics research they encounter in everyday life. Furthermore, essentialist accounts are often embedded within popular understanding of politically sensitive topics, such as eugenics, race, and sex, and therefore it is important to examine how people comprehend genetic influences on behaviour.
In this dissertation, I review current findings regarding the effects of genetic attributions on beliefs, attitudes, and behaviours in the context of the social world. Particular attention is paid to such effects in the context of gender issues. Specifically, in three studies I examine the effects of exposure to scientific theories concerning human sexuality on attitudes towards and evaluations of men’s dubious sexual behaviors. The results indicate that among men exposure to evolutionary psychology arguments leads to more lenient evaluations and judgments of an array of dubious sexual behaviors, compared with exposure to social constructivist arguments. It also seems that men implicitly hold nativist perceptions with regards to male sexuality and promiscuity. The findings were less conclusive among women, with some indication that women are less affected by such exposure as well as less likely to naturally hold a nativist perspective in the context of human sexuality. This empirical research has direct implications for previously suggested intervention programs and adds to the incurrent resurgence of interest in the effects of genetic theories. Finally, I identify areas where further exploration is needed, suggest potential solutions for specific problems, and evaluate related individual and social implications.Arts, Faculty ofPsychology, Department ofGraduat
I can (not) avoid doing badly : the effects of perceived source of a self-relevant stereotype on performance
The theory of stereotype threat states that activating self-relevant stereotypes
can lead people to exhibit stereotype-consistent behavior. Stereotype threat most
commonly arises under circumstances in which a negative self-relevant
stereotype is applicable, the person's membership in the stereotyped group is
made salient, and the person believes that their performance on a task will be
evaluated.
It seems that a certain element in stereotypes conveys an inescapable expected
behavior to members of the stereotyped social group. Putting this assertion to
test we manipulated the perceived inevitability of a stereotype-related group
difference. Research on Nature vs. nurture causal attributions suggests that
people perceive genetic causes to be more inescapable than experiential ones.
Using a repeated measures design, causal attributions concerning gender-based
differences in mathematical ability were manipulated by presetting either geneticbased
or experientially-based explanations for the gender-related math
performance differences, while the strength of the alleged differences was held
constant. A third condition asserted that there are no gender differences in math.
Additional variable tested was the presence of men's influence on women math
performance.
Results supported the hypothesis that the perceived cause for gender differences
in math ability affects women's mathematical performance. Women who were
exposed to a genetic explanation performed significantly worse than those
exposed to experiential explanation. Men's presence did not significantly
influence women's math performance. The results indicate one way in which
genetic essentialism might affect people's behaviour. Several more implications,
as well as future directions are discussed.Arts, Faculty ofPsychology, Department ofGraduat
Aversion vs. Abstinence: Conceptual Distinctions for the Receptivity Toward Algorithmic Decision-Making Systems Within Value-laden Contexts
Whilst algorithmic decision-making systems (ADMS) become increasingly pertinent across several contexts, many remain reluctant to adopt such systems, preferring human alternatives – often explored as “Algorithm Aversion”. However, the associated literature primarily frames this tendency in a utility-focused fashion, based on users’ perceptions of efficacy or accuracy. This framing offers a narrow scope of “aversion” that neglects emotional and experiential elements that may be at play, as well as especially prominent in “value-laden contexts” (e.g., medicine). This study uses an inductive approach to identifying various concepts and themes emerging from open-ended responses to the potential use of a future ADMS in such a context. Different reactions (both reluctant and receptive) of ADMS are then discussed and offered conceptual distinctions that may inform future examinations of the resulting biases. In doing so, we start to respond to the call for qualitative research examining the underlying motives related to Algorithm Aversion
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
The present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Variations on the Author
“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
We provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
We conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued
use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation
counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more
sophisticated methods
- …
