The impact of generative artificial intelligence on socioeconomic inequalities and policy making.

Generative artificial intelligence (AI) has the potential to both exacerbate and ameliorate existing socioeconomic inequalities. In this article, we provide a state-of-the-art interdisciplinary overview of the potential impacts of generative AI on (mis)information and three information-intensive domains: work, education, and healthcare. Our goal is to highlight how generative AI could worsen existing inequalities while illuminating how AI may help mitigate pervasive social problems. In the information domain, generative AI can democratize content creation and access but may dramatically expand the production and proliferation of misinformation. In the workplace, it can boost productivity and create new jobs, but the benefits will likely be distributed unevenly. In education, it offers personalized learning, but may widen the digital divide. In healthcare, it might improve diagnostics and accessibility, but could deepen pre-existing inequalities. In each section, we cover a specific topic, evaluate existing research, identify critical gaps, and recommend research directions, including explicit trade-offs that complicate the derivation of a priori hypotheses. We conclude with a section highlighting the role of policymaking to maximize generative AI's potential to reduce inequalities while mitigating its harmful effects. We discuss strengths and weaknesses of existing policy frameworks in the European Union, the United States, and the United Kingdom, observing that each fails to fully confront the socioeconomic challenges we have identified. We propose several concrete policies that could promote shared prosperity through the advancement of generative AI. This article emphasizes the need for interdisciplinary collaborations to understand and address the complex challenges of generative AI.

Clinical trajectories of hand function impairment in systemic sclerosis: an unmet clinical need across disease subsets.

BACKGROUND: Hand involvement is an early manifestation of systemic sclerosis (SSc), culprit of diagnosis and classification, and recognised major driver of disability. Impairment of hand function burdens both limited and diffuse cutaneous subsets and therefore could be targeted as 'basket' endpoint in SSc. Nevertheless, its natural history in current standard of care is not well characterised, limiting the design of targeted trials. The aim of this study is to describe prevalence, natural history and clinical factors associated with hand function deterioration in a longitudinal, multicentre, observational SSc cohort. METHODS: Hand function was captured through the validated Cochin Hand Function Scale in patients consecutively enrolled in a multicentre observational study and observed over 24 months. Minimal clinically important differences and patient acceptable symptom state were analysed as previously described. RESULTS: Three hundred and ninety-six consecutive patients were enrolled from 10 centres; 201 with complete follow-up data were included in the analysis. Median (IQR) disease duration was 5 (2-11) years. One hundred and five (52.2%) patients reported clinically significant worsening. Accordingly, the proportion of patients reporting unacceptable hand function increased over 2 years from 27.8% to 35.8% (p<0.001). Least absolute shrinkage and selection operator analysis identified male gender, disease subset, Raynaud's Condition Score, tenosynovitis and pain, as some of the key factors associated with worsening hand involvement. CONCLUSIONS: Hand function deteriorates over time in more than 50% of SSc patients despite available therapies. The analysis of factors associated with hand function worsening supports the involvement of both inflammation, vascular and fibrotic processes in hand involvement, making it a hallmark clinical manifestation of SSc. Our data are poised to inform the design of intervention studies to target this major driver of disability in SSc.

A synthesis of evidence for policy from behavioural science during COVID-19.

Scientific evidence regularly guides policy decisions1, with behavioural science increasingly part of this process2. In April 2020, an influential paper3 proposed 19 policy recommendations ('claims') detailing how evidence from behavioural science could contribute to efforts to reduce impacts and end the COVID-19 pandemic. Here we assess 747 pandemic-related research articles that empirically investigated those claims. We report the scale of evidence and whether evidence supports them to indicate applicability for policymaking. Two independent teams, involving 72 reviewers, found evidence for 18 of 19 claims, with both teams finding evidence supporting 16 (89%) of those 18 claims. The strongest evidence supported claims that anticipated culture, polarization and misinformation would be associated with policy effectiveness. Claims suggesting trusted leaders and positive social norms increased adherence to behavioural interventions also had strong empirical support, as did appealing to social consensus or bipartisan agreement. Targeted language in messaging yielded mixed effects and there were no effects for highlighting individual benefits or protecting others. No available evidence existed to assess any distinct differences in effects between using the terms 'physical distancing' and 'social distancing'. Analysis of 463 papers containing data showed generally large samples; 418 involved human participants with a mean of 16,848 (median of 1,699). That statistical power underscored improved suitability of behavioural science research for informing policy decisions. Furthermore, by implementing a standardized approach to evidence selection and synthesis, we amplify broader implications for advancing scientific evidence in policy formulation and prioritization.

Coping strategies and belief in COVID-19 conspiracy theories.

Conspiracy beliefs have been related to aversive emotional experiences often accompanying major world events and have also been linked to maladaptive ways of coping with stress. In this research, we examined how different coping strategies (i.e. self-sufficient, social-support, avoidance and religious) predicted the adoption of COVID-19 conspiracy theories. In two studies (Study 1, n = 1000 and Study 2, n = 616) conducted among Polish participants, we found that avoidance and religious coping were positively linked to COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs. In Study 1, conspiracy beliefs also mediated the positive relationships between avoidance and religious coping and adherence to safety and self-isolation guidelines during the COVID-19 pandemic. Study 2 additionally showed that the relationship between fear, induced by reading threatening news on COVID-19, and conspiracy beliefs was the strongest among those high in avoidance coping. These studies highlight the role of coping strategies in the adoption of COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs.

Does Belief in Conspiracy Theories Affect Interpersonal Relationships?

In recent years, researchers have begun to study the social consequences of conspiracy beliefs. However, little research has investigated the impact of conspiracy beliefs on interpersonal relationships. In this review, we draw attention to this issue by summarizing available empirical evidence and proposing potential social-psychological mechanisms to explain whether and why conspiracy theories affect interpersonal relationships. We firstly discuss that the attitude change that often accompanies the internalization of conspiracy beliefs might distance people's opinions and, consequently, erode their relationships. Furthermore, we argue that the stigmatizing value of conspiracy theories can negatively affect the evaluation of conspiracy believers and discourage others from getting close to them. Finally, we consider that the misperception of social norms associated with the acceptance of certain conspiracy narratives can lead conspiracy believers to engage in non-normative behavior. Others are likely to perceive such behavior negatively, resulting in diminished interpersonal interaction. We highlight the need for further research to address these issues, as well as the potential factors that may prevent relationships being eroded by conspiracy beliefs.

Are we smart enough to remember how smart animals are?

Some theoretical perspectives suggest people overestimate animals' mental capacities (anthropomorphism), while others suggest the reverse (mind-denial). However, studies have generally not employed objective criteria against which the accuracy or appropriateness of people's judgments about animals can be tested. We employed memory paradigms, in which judgments are clearly right or wrong, in nine experiments (eight preregistered; n = 3,162). When tested shortly after exposure, meat-eaters' memory about companion animals (e.g., dogs) but not food animals (e.g., pigs) showed an anthropomorphic bias: they remembered more information consistent with animals having versus lacking a mind (Experiments 1-4). Vegetarians' and vegans' memory, on the other hand, consistently showed an anthropomorphic bias regarding food and companion animals alike (Experiments 5 and 6). When tested a week after exposure, both those who eat meat and those who do not showed signs of shifting toward a mind-denying bias (Experiments 2, 3, and 6). These biases had important consequences for beliefs about animal minds. Inducing mind-denying memory biases caused participants to see animals as possessing less sophisticated minds (Experiments 7-9). The work demonstrates that memories concerning animals' minds can depart predictably from reality and that such departures can contribute to biased evaluations of their mental capacities. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Does Belief in Conspiracy Theories Affect Interpersonal Relationships?

In recent years, researchers have begun to study the social consequences of conspiracy beliefs. However, little research has investigated the impact of conspiracy beliefs on interpersonal relationships. In this review, we draw attention to this issue by summarizing available empirical evidence and proposing potential social-psychological mechanisms to explain whether and why conspiracy theories affect interpersonal relationships. We firstly discuss that the attitude change that often accompanies the internalization of conspiracy beliefs might distance people’s opinions and, consequently, erode their relationships. Furthermore, we argue that the stigmatizing value of conspiracy theories can negatively affect the evaluation of conspiracy believers and discourage others from getting close to them. Finally, we consider that the misperception of social norms associated with the acceptance of certain conspiracy narratives can lead conspiracy believers to engage in non-normative behavior. Others are likely to perceive such behavior negatively, resulting in diminished interpersonal interaction. We highlight the need for further research to address these issues, as well as the potential factors that may prevent relationships being eroded by conspiracy beliefs. (AU)

Management of systemic sclerosis: British Society for Rheumatology guideline scope.

This guideline will provide a practical roadmap for management of SSc that builds upon the previous treatment guideline to incorporate advances in evidence-based treatment and increased knowledge about assessment, classification and management. General approaches to management as well as treatment of specific complications will be covered, including lung, cardiac, renal and gastrointestinal tract disease, as well as RP, digital vasculopathy, skin manifestations, calcinosis and impact on quality of life. It will include guidance related to emerging approved therapies for interstitial lung disease and account for National Health Service England prescribing policies and national guidance relevant to SSc. The guideline will be developed using the methods and processes outlined in Creating Clinical Guidelines: Our Protocol. This development process to produce guidance, advice and recommendations for practice has National Institute for Health and Care Excellence accreditation.

Pandemic boredom: Little evidence that lockdown-related boredom affects risky public health behaviors across 116 countries.

Some public officials have expressed concern that policies mandating collective public health behaviors (e.g., national/regional "lockdown") may result in behavioral fatigue that ultimately renders such policies ineffective. Boredom, specifically, has been singled out as one potential risk factor for noncompliance. We examined whether there was empirical evidence to support this concern during the COVID-19 pandemic in a large cross-national sample of 63,336 community respondents from 116 countries. Although boredom was higher in countries with more COVID-19 cases and in countries that instituted more stringent lockdowns, such boredom did not predict longitudinal within-person decreases in social distancing behavior (or vice versa; n = 8,031) in early spring and summer of 2020. Overall, we found little evidence that changes in boredom predict individual public health behaviors (handwashing, staying home, self-quarantining, and avoiding crowds) over time, or that such behaviors had any reliable longitudinal effects on boredom itself. In summary, contrary to concerns, we found little evidence that boredom posed a public health risk during lockdown and quarantine. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

An international survey of current management practices for polymyalgia rheumatica by general practitioners and rheumatologists.

OBJECTIVES: To explore current management practices for PMR by general practitioners (GPs) and rheumatologists including implications for clinical trial recruitment. METHODS: An English language questionnaire was constructed by a working group of rheumatologists and GPs from six countries. The questionnaire focused on: 1: Respondent characteristics; 2: Referral practices; 3: Treatment with glucocorticoids; 4: Diagnostics; 5: Comorbidities; and 6: Barriers to research. The questionnaire was distributed to rheumatologists and GPs worldwide via members of the International PMR/Giant Cell Arteritis Study Group. RESULTS: In total, 394 GPs and 937 rheumatologists responded to the survey. GPs referred a median of 25% of their suspected PMR patients for diagnosis and 50% of these were returned to their GP for management. In general, 39% of rheumatologists evaluated patients with suspected PMR >2 weeks after referral, and a median of 50% of patients had started prednisolone before rheumatologist evaluation. Direct comparison of initial treatment showed that the percentage prescribing >25 mg prednisolone daily for patients was 30% for GPs and 12% for rheumatologists. Diagnostic imaging was rarely used. More than half (56%) of rheumatologists experienced difficulties recruiting people with PMR to clinical trials. CONCLUSION: This large international survey indicates that a large proportion of people with PMR are not referred for diagnosis, and that the proportion of treatment-naive patients declined with increasing time from referral to assessment. Strategies are needed to change referral and management of people with PMR, to improve clinical practice and facilitate recruitment to clinical trials.

A Phase II randomized controlled trial of oral prednisolone in early diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis (PRedSS).

OBJECTIVES: Although the painful and disabling features of early diffuse cutaneous SSc (dcSSc) have an inflammatory basis and could respond to corticosteroids, corticosteroids are a risk factor for scleroderma renal crisis. Whether or not they should be prescribed is therefore highly contentious. Our aim was to examine safety and efficacy of moderate-dose prednisolone in early dcSSc. METHODS: PRedSS set out as a Phase II, multicentre, double-blind randomized controlled trial, converted to open-label during the Covid-19 pandemic. Patients were randomized to receive either prednisolone (∼0.3 mg/kg) or matching placebo (or no treatment during open-label) for 6 months. Co-primary endpoints were the HAQ Disability Index (HAQ-DI) and modified Rodnan skin score (mRSS) at 3 months. Over 20 secondary endpoints included patient reported outcome measures reflecting pain, itch, fatigue, anxiety and depression, and helplessness. Target recruitment was 72 patients. RESULTS: Thirty-five patients were randomized (17 prednisolone, 18 placebo/control). The adjusted mean difference between treatment groups at 3 months in HAQ-DI score was -0.10 (97.5% CI: -0.29, 0.10), P = 0.254, and in mRSS -3.90 (97.5% CI: -8.83, 1.03), P = 0.070, both favouring prednisolone but not significantly. Patients in the prednisolone group experienced significantly less pain (P = 0.027), anxiety (P = 0.018) and helplessness (P = 0.040) than control patients at 3 months. There were no renal crises, but sample size was small. CONCLUSION: PRedSS was terminated early primarily due to the Covid-19 pandemic, and so was underpowered. Therefore, interpretation must be cautious and results considered inconclusive, indicating the need for a further randomized trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, https://clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03708718.

Intentions to be Vaccinated Against COVID-19: The Role of Prosociality and Conspiracy Beliefs across 20 Countries.

Understanding the determinants of COVID-19 vaccine uptake is important to inform policy decisions and plan vaccination campaigns. The aims of this research were to: (1) explore the individual- and country-level determinants of intentions to be vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2, and (2) examine worldwide variation in vaccination intentions. This cross-sectional online survey was conducted during the first wave of the pandemic, involving 6697 respondents across 20 countries. Results showed that 72.9% of participants reported positive intentions to be vaccinated against COVID-19, whereas 16.8% were undecided, and 10.3% reported they would not be vaccinated. At the individual level, prosociality was a significant positive predictor of vaccination intentions, whereas generic beliefs in conspiracy theories and religiosity were negative predictors. Country-level determinants, including cultural dimensions of individualism/collectivism and power distance, were not significant predictors of vaccination intentions. Altogether, this study identifies individual-level predictors that are common across multiple countries, provides further evidence on the importance of combating conspiracy theories, involving religious institutions in vaccination campaigns, and stimulating prosocial motives to encourage vaccine uptake.

Individual, intergroup and nation-level influences on belief in conspiracy theories.

Conspiracy theories are part of mainstream public life, with the potential to undermine governments, promote racism, ignite extremism and threaten public health efforts. Psychological research on conspiracy theories is booming, with more than half of the academic articles on the topic published since 2019. In this Review, we synthesize the literature with an eye to understanding the psychological factors that shape willingness to believe conspiracy theories. We begin at the individual level, examining the cognitive, clinical, motivational, personality and developmental factors that predispose people to believe conspiracy theories. Drawing on insights from social and evolutionary psychology, we then review research examining conspiracy theories as an intergroup phenomenon that reflects and reinforces societal fault lines. Finally, we examine how conspiracy theories are shaped by the economic, political, cultural and socio-historical contexts at the national level. This multilevel approach offers a deep and broad insight into conspiracist thinking that increases understanding of the problem and offers potential solutions.

Changing minds about minds: Evidence that people are too sceptical about animal sentience.

Our relationships with other animals are governed by how we view their capacity for sentience and suffering. However, there is currently little agreement as to whether people's beliefs about animal minds are largely accurate or inaccurate. We used an innovative task to examine how people update their beliefs in response to noisy but informative clues about animal minds. This allowed us to compare participants' posterior beliefs to what a normative participant ought to believe if they conform to Bayes' theorem. Five studies (four pre-registered; n = 2417) found that participants shifted their beliefs too far in response to clues that suggested animals do not have minds (i.e., overshooting what a normative participant ought to believe), but not far enough in response to clues that suggested animals have minds (i.e., falling short of what a normative participant ought to believe). A final study demonstrated that this effect was attenuated when humans were the targets of belief. The findings demonstrate that people underestimate animal minds in a way that can be said to be inaccurate and highlight the role of belief updating in downplaying evidence of animal minds. The findings are discussed in relation to speciesist beliefs about the supremacy of humans over animals.

What Are Conspiracy Theories? A Definitional Approach to Their Correlates, Consequences, and Communication.

Conspiracy theories are abundant in social and political discourse, with serious consequences for individuals, groups, and societies. However, psychological scientists have started paying close attention to them only in the past 20 years. We review the spectacular progress that has since been made and some of the limitations of research so far, and we consider the prospects for further progress. To this end, we take a step back to analyze the defining features that make conspiracy theories different in kind from other beliefs and different in degree from each other. We consider how these features determine the adoption, consequences, and transmission of belief in conspiracy theories, even though their role as causal or moderating variables has seldom been examined. We therefore advocate for a research agenda in the study of conspiracy theories that starts-as is routine in fields such as virology and toxicology-with a robust descriptive analysis of the ontology of the entity at its center.

Rabbit Hole Syndrome: Inadvertent, accelerating, and entrenched commitment to conspiracy beliefs.

There is mounting anecdotal evidence that some individuals fall into conspiracy "rabbit holes" causing harms ranging from social isolation to violence. We propose a hypothetical Rabbit Hole Syndrome in which some individuals' subscription to conspiracy beliefs is initially inadvertent, accelerates recursively, then becomes difficult to escape. This proposal is distinguished by a person-centered and dynamic perspective on conspiracy beliefs. It aims to provide a theoretical foundation for research that (a) illuminates the rabbit hole phenomenon, (b) is pluralistic, spanning diverse subdisciplines (e.g., social and clinical psychology), and methods (e.g., qualitative, longitudinal, and case studies), and (c) informs theory and practice by uncovering discontinuities between committed believers and other populations in the causes, consequences, and "remedies" of conspiracy beliefs.

Using machine learning to identify important predictors of COVID-19 infection prevention behaviors during the early phase of the pandemic.

Before vaccines for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) became available, a set of infection-prevention behaviors constituted the primary means to mitigate the virus spread. Our study aimed to identify important predictors of this set of behaviors. Whereas social and health psychological theories suggest a limited set of predictors, machine-learning analyses can identify correlates from a larger pool of candidate predictors. We used random forests to rank 115 candidate correlates of infection-prevention behavior in 56,072 participants across 28 countries, administered in March to May 2020. The machine-learning model predicted 52% of the variance in infection-prevention behavior in a separate test sample-exceeding the performance of psychological models of health behavior. Results indicated the two most important predictors related to individual-level injunctive norms. Illustrating how data-driven methods can complement theory, some of the most important predictors were not derived from theories of health behavior-and some theoretically derived predictors were relatively unimportant.

Predictors of adherence to public health behaviors for fighting COVID-19 derived from longitudinal data.

The present paper examines longitudinally how subjective perceptions about COVID-19, one's community, and the government predict adherence to public health measures to reduce the spread of the virus. Using an international survey (N = 3040), we test how infection risk perception, trust in the governmental response and communications about COVID-19, conspiracy beliefs, social norms on distancing, tightness of culture, and community punishment predict various containment-related attitudes and behavior. Autoregressive analyses indicate that, at the personal level, personal hygiene behavior was predicted by personal infection risk perception. At social level, social distancing behaviors such as abstaining from face-to-face contact were predicted by perceived social norms. Support for behavioral mandates was predicted by confidence in the government and cultural tightness, whereas support for anti-lockdown protests was predicted by (lower) perceived clarity of communication about the virus. Results are discussed in light of policy implications and creating effective interventions.