How students view online knowledge: Epistemic beliefs, self-regulated learning and academic misconduct

The use of the internet in education has been greatly encouraged by the COVID-19 epidemic. Studying students' internet-specific epistemic beliefs (ISEB) and possible correlates would benefit online teaching and learning. However, little research has been conducted in this field. Therefore, we investigated the current status of ISEB among college students and considered the impact of self-regulated learning (SRL) and e-academic dishonesty (e-AD) on ISEB. A survey research method and convenience sampling were employed. A total of 538 Chinese college students completed the self-reported questionnaire. Our results indicate that although no significant differences were found in ISEB in terms of gender and academic major, students with different backgrounds also differed in e-AD experience and SRL. Three dimensions of ISEB were negatively correlated with SRL, while one had a significant positive correlation. In addition, the latter dimension of ISEB was negatively correlated with e-AD. Finally, SRL and e-AD jointly significantly predicted students' different ISEB, with explanatory power ranging from 14% to 36%. Study techniques of SRL were common predictors that could negatively predict the certainty, simplicity, and source of ISEB and positively predict justification. Based on the results, specific methods for schools, teachers and librarians to enhance students' ISEB are provided. © 2023

The Mitigating Influence of Perspective Taking on Attitude Polarization: An Analysis of Mediation and Transfer Effect

Citizens in modern society are faced with complex and controversial public issues. For example, Taiwanese referenda in 2018 and 2021 involved 10 and 4 proposals, respectively. These proposals covered a range of controversial topics such as whether to resume the construction of a nuclear power plant and whether to legalize same-sex marriage. Discussions of these multifaceted topics often caused heated debates and resulted in attitude polarization. People often became more opinionated and believed more firmly in their initial stances on the issues. As attitude polarization is a major cause of interpersonal and intergroup conflicts and even social unrest, this research investigated how to mitigate the polarization of attitudes toward social issues. This study drew upon the theory of perspective taking for insights into the mitigation of attitude polarization. Perspective taking refers to one's attempt or ability to consider something from someone else's perspective. Perspective taking has been studied by psychologists as a means of reducing prejudice, fostering cooperation, and lowering reasoning biases that were found to be responsible for attitude polarization. Attitude polarization is, at least partially, a result of biased information processing. For example, people may become more entrenched in their opinions after engaging in biased assimilation, which entails, for instance, evaluating information supporting their opinions as more convincing than that opposing their opinions. Per the dual process theory, the reasoning biases that cause attitude polarization often reflect the influence of Type 1 processing, which usually involves responding to information intuitively and generating outcomes consistent with existing beliefs. Such outcomes can be either reinforced or overridden by Type 2 processing, which involves deliberation and evidence-based consideration. If an intuitive response is reinforced, an individual's attitude is likely to become entrenched, leading to polarization;if overridden, attitude polarization may be inhibited or attenuated. We proposed that perspective taking may serve as an overriding mechanism to mitigate attitude polarization. Perspective taking enables individuals to undertake a form of Type 2 processing called decontextualized reasoning, which features a type of self-distancing that allows individuals to decouple existing beliefs from reasoning processes. Such a reasoning style can arguably be triggered by perspective taking because this requires individuals to examine information by considering their own thinking with increased psychological distance and adopting alternative perspectives. Although research has suggested a link between perspective taking and decontextualized reasoning, how decontextualized reasoning can be measured and whether it indeed serves as a mediator between perspective taking and attitude polarization have yet to be deeply investigated. Integrating studies on perspective taking, information processing, and attitude change, this study proposed three hypotheses and tested them by conducting an experiment involving a writing task focused on social issues. First, we hypothesized that perspective taking would mitigate attitude polarization. We measured attitude polarization by calculating the difference in attitude toward an issue before and after the writing task. Second, we proposed that the mitigation of attitude polarization would be mediated by decontextualized reasoning induced by perspective taking. To investigate this hypothesis, we used a text analysis tool, namely Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC). Research on LIWC has shown that the frequency with which people use words in their writing reflects psychological features and cognitive styles. Because decontextualized reasoning features a shift of attention from the self to others, we argued that it can be detected in the difference between the frequency of using third-person plural and first-person singular pronouns. The greater this difference is, the greater the extent to which decontextualized reaso ing is likely to have been adopted by a writer. Finally, we drew upon the secondary transfer effect of intergroup contact theory and proposed that the mitigating effect outlined in the first hypothesis would influence people's attitudes even when not directly instructed to engage in perspective taking. To test this transfer effect, the writing task included two sessions, and perspective taking instructions were only given in one of the sessions. The experimental procedure was as follows. We recruited 95 participants (50 female;mean age = 23.7 years, SD = 3.4) for the writing task experiment. Participants first indicated their attitude toward two issues that are controversial in Taiwan (making Taiwan nuclear-free and abolishing the death penalty) on a 7-point Likert scale with responses ranging from absolutely disagree to absolutely agree and then wrote arguments supporting or opposing the issues in two writing sessions. When writing about one of the issues in the first session, all participants wrote arguments from their own perspective;when writing about the other issue in the second session, half of the participants continued to write from their own perspective (control condition) while the other half wrote from the perspective of someone holding the view opposite of their own (perspective-taking condition). Participants then again indicated their attitude toward both issues using the same 7-point scale. The whole experiment took approximately 30 minutes to complete. Analysis of attitude polarization between the two conditions showed that compared with the control group (M = 0.77, SD = 1.09), for the essays written in the second session, participants in the perspective-taking group (M = −0.02, SD = 1.74) displayed weaker attitude polarization, t(93) = 2.63, p = .010, d = 0.540. Based on LIWC output for the second essay for the decontextualized reasoning indicator (frequency of use of third-person plural pronouns minus that of first-person singular pronouns), compared with the control group (M = −1.04, SD = 1.20), the perspective-taking group (M = −0.08, SD = 0.95) engaged in decontextualized reasoning to a greater extent, t(93) = 4.34, p < .001, d = 0.890. Mediation analysis using the SPSS Process Macro further revealed that this difference mediated the mitigating effect found during analysis, and thus, participants in the perspective-taking group engaged in more decontextualized reasoning and exhibited weaker attitude polarization than those in the control group: indirect effect = −0.28, 95% confidence interval: [−0.54, −0.07];direct effect = −0.50, p = .122. Because all participants wrote from their own perspective in the first session, the difference in attitude polarization resulting from the first essay allowed us to examine the transfer effect. Compared with participants in the control group (M = 0.79, SD = 1.56), those in the perspective-taking group (M = 0.10, SD = 1.37) again displayed weaker attitude polarization, t(93) = 2.27, p = .026, d = 0.465. Taken together, the results revealed that perspective taking mitigated polarization of attitudes toward social issues due to greater engagement in decontextualized reasoning, a form of Type 2 processing that involves self-distancing. This mitigating effect was evident for issues where the perspective-taking manipulation was not applied, thus indicating a transfer effect. These findings can have valuable implications for areas where controversies and conflicts abound. For example, during the COVID-19 pandemic, disputes occurred over issues such as the necessity of vaccines, legitimacy of lockdown measures, and the distribution of supplies. These issues fall into the category of socioscientific issues (SSIs), which have been defined as crucial real-world scientific issues with social significance. Other examples of SSIs include issues pertaining to climate change, genetically modified products, and genetic testing. As were the issues used in our writing tasks, SSIs are often controversial in nature, and information relating to them is often p ocessed through an ideological lens, which can lead to attitude polarization and conflict. Helping students develop the ability to approach SSIs with scientific and fact-based reasoning has become a key objective of science and citizenship education. The manipulation used in our study can be integrated into course materials to help students analyze SSIs from multiple perspectives and avoid becoming entrenched in their opinions. Furthermore, such a practice may even affect perspectives on issues not discussed in class due to the transfer effect of perspective taking. Whether the mitigating effect of perspective taking on attitude polarization can be replicated in the classroom or other real-world settings warrants further exploration. Future research directions and other implications are also discussed. © 2022, National Taiwan Normal University. All rights reserved.

Inflammasome Activation-Induced Hypercoagulopathy: Impact on Cardiovascular Dysfunction Triggered in COVID-19 Patients

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is the most devastating infectious disease in the 21st century with more than 2 million lives lost in less than a year. The activation of inflammasome in the host infected by SARS-CoV-2 is highly related to cytokine storm and hypercoagulopathy, which significantly contribute to the poor prognosis of COVID-19 patients. Even though many studies have shown the host defense mechanism induced by inflammasome against various viral infections, mechanistic interactions leading to downstream cellular responses and pathogenesis in COVID-19 remain unclear. The SARS-CoV-2 infection has been associated with numerous cardiovascular disorders including acute myocardial injury, myocarditis, arrhythmias, and venous thromboembolism. The inflammatory response triggered by the activation of NLRP3 inflammasome under certain cardiovascular conditions resulted in hyperinflammation or the modulation of angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 signaling pathways. Perturbations of several target cells and tissues have been described in inflammasome activation, including pneumocytes, macrophages, endothelial cells, and dendritic cells. The interplay between inflammasome activation and hypercoagulopathy in COVID-19 patients is an emerging area to be further addressed. Targeted therapeutics to suppress inflammasome activation may have a positive effect on the reduction of hyperinflammation-induced hypercoagulopathy and cardiovascular disorders occurring as COVID-19 complications.

Acute cardiac injury and acute kidney injury associated with severity and mortality in patients with COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the incidence and risk factors for acute cardiac injury (ACI) and acute kidney injury (AKI), and then investigate their effect on severity and mortality in patients with COVID-19. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 1249 patients with COVID-19 were included in this retrospective study. Predictors of ACI and AKI were investigated. Multivariable-logistic regression models were used to determine the association of ACI (or AKI) with severity and mortality. RESULTS: Median age of patients was 36 years and 61.9% were male. ACI and AKI were observed in 53 (4.2%) and 91 (7.3%) of patients, respectively. Patients with age > 60 years, chronic heart disease, decreased lymphocyte and increased CRP, PCT, and ESR on hospital admission, and Lopinavir/Ritonavir use showed higher odds of ACI. Patients with age > 60 years, male, obesity, hypertension, chronic kidney disease, decreased lymphocyte and increased CRP, PCT, and ESR on hospital admission showed higher odds of AKI. Increased Hs-cTnI (> 300 ng/L), Pro-BNP (> 2500 pg/ml) and decreased e-GFR (< 60 ml/min) revealed higher adjusted mortality. CONCLUSIONS: ACI and AKI were not common in COVID-19 patients in Shanghai, China. However, patients with ACI/AKI had higher severity-rate and mortality-rate when compared to those without ACI/AKI.

Dynamics of cytokines and lymphocyte subsets associated with the poor prognosis of severe COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to study the dynamics of cytokines and lymphocyte subsets and their correlation with the prognosis of patients with severe COVID-19. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The lymphocyte subsets and cytokines of 31 patients with severe COVID-19 (7 deaths and 24 survivals) were longitudinally analyzed. RESULTS: The mean age of enrolled patients was 64 years, 24 (77.4%) patients were men, and 23 (74.2%) patients had comorbidities. Compared with survival group, the death group showed significant and sustained increases in the levels of IL-6, IL-8, and IL-10 from baseline to 28 days after admission (all p<0.05). No significant differences were observed in the levels of TNF-α, IL-1b, IL-2, IL-4, IL-5, IL-12P70, IL-17, IFN-α, and IFN-γ between the death group and survival group during the follow-up (all p>0.05). The absolute counts of CD3+ T cells, CD4+ T cells, CD8+ T cells, and CD45+ T cells were lower in both survival group and death group patients from hospital admission to 3 days after admission, and gradually recovered in 4 to 35 days in the survival group, but continually stayed at low levels in the death group during the follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The kinetic changes of cytokines and lymphocyte subsets are related with the prognosis of patients with severe COVID-19.