Category Archives: Human Behavior

Human Behavior

Commentary: Help! I have been replaced by AI. – Salt Lake Tribune

Scott Sommerdorf | The Salt Lake TribuneReligion News Service columnist Thomas Reese speaks in Salt Lake City in 2015.

By Thomas Reese | Religion News Service

| March 27, 2023, 10:25 p.m.

After I sent a Jesuit lawyer an analysis from the Brookings Institution on how rapid advances in artificial intelligence could revolutionize the legal profession, he got even by asking ChatGPT to write a column on AI, written in the style of Thomas Reese, SJ.

Ive appended it below, with mixed feelings: It is a good first draft, but thankfully my editor tells me I will not be replaced by an AI. Even if it does, theres an upside: The AI could continue cranking out my columns long after I am dead. I may lose my job, but I would be immortal.

Since Ive been writing weekly columns for more than 20 years, the AI program, which draws from relevant writing already available on the internet, had lots of data to mine. Its analysis, too, is nuanced and raises important ethical issues.

Notably missing from Chat GPTs analysis, however, is any commentary from the Vatican and Pope Francis about AI, which I would have included.

At a meeting in the Vatican in January, according to Catholic News Service, Francis told tech leaders to ensure that the discriminatory use of these instruments does not take root at the expense of the most fragile and excluded. It is not acceptable that the decision about someones life and future be entrusted to an algorithm.

The pope hoped that the technology would be used at the service of the common good of all and the care of the common home.

At the end of the conference, according to CNS, Catholic, Jewish and Muslim representatives signed a declaration calling on AI researchers to engage with ethicists and religious leaders to develop a framework for the ethical use of AI.

They called for the development of an artificial intelligence that serves every person and humanity as a whole; that respects the dignity of the human person, so that every individual can benefit from the advances of technology; and that does not have as its sole goal greater profit or the gradual replacement of people in the workplace.

Below is the column by ChatGPT in the style of Thomas Reese, SJ., unedited:

As a Jesuit priest, I have always believed that our human capacity for reason and thought is one of the greatest gifts that we have been given. In the last few decades, however, we have witnessed a new and powerful tool emerge: artificial intelligence (AI). While AI has undoubtedly brought about a host of benefits, it has also given rise to concerns about its impact on human dignity and autonomy.

On one hand, AI has enabled us to make tremendous strides in fields such as medicine, transportation, and communication. From self-driving cars to virtual assistants, the technology has made our lives easier and more efficient. AI has also helped us to better understand complex systems and to make more accurate predictions about everything from the weather to financial markets.

However, as we embrace the benefits of AI, we must also be cautious about its potential negative consequences. One of the most pressing concerns is the impact of AI on human work and employment. As machines become increasingly capable of performing complex tasks, many jobs that were once done by humans are being automated. This could result in significant job losses and economic upheaval, particularly for those in low-skilled jobs.

Another concern is the potential loss of human autonomy and decision-making power. As AI becomes more advanced, it may become increasingly difficult for humans to understand and control its actions. This could result in a loss of accountability and responsibility, which could have serious ethical implications.

Moreover, we must also consider the potential impact of AI on human relationships and social structures. As machines become more adept at understanding human behavior and emotions, they may be able to replace human interactions in areas such as education and healthcare. This could lead to a loss of empathy and human connection, which are essential to our sense of well-being and fulfillment.

Given these concerns, it is clear that we must approach the development and deployment of AI with caution and prudence. We must ensure that we are using this technology to enhance, rather than replace, human abilities and capacities. We must also be vigilant in our efforts to ensure that AI is used in ways that are consistent with our values and principles.

In conclusion, while AI has the potential to bring about many benefits, we must approach it with care and caution. As we continue to develop this technology, we must be mindful of its impact on human dignity, autonomy, and relationships. By doing so, we can ensure that AI is used to serve humanity, rather than the other way around.

(The views expressed in this opinion piece do not necessarily reflect those of Religion News Service.)

The rest is here:
Commentary: Help! I have been replaced by AI. - Salt Lake Tribune

Human Behavior

Elisabeth Smolarz’s The Encyclopedia of Things The Brooklyn Rail – Brooklyn Rail

What objects best represent you? Its a question one inevitably asks oneself after perusing The Encyclopedia of Things, an exercise in identity distillation. This is a book of portraits absent of the people they represent, states Michelle Levy, who edited the tome, regarding the still life ensembles that fill the pages. Dreamed up by Polish-born New York-based artist Elisabeth Smolarz, the project began in 2014 and focuses on opening the channels of communication to the inanimate and the subconscious in conjunction with people she encounters. The project came about after Superstorm Sandy in 2012, when Smolarz became fascinated by how people held onto items ruined by the catastrophe. The groupings, selected by each individual from their own belongings, are both familiar and inscrutable, peppered with a bedraggled once-plush Babar or a single Emperor tarot card or a silver chain or a Hard Rock cafe leather jacket or a New Jersey drivers license or cat art or a vintage camera (Yashica, Rolleiflex) or a cartoon-imprinted mug or old spectacles or a VHS tape or a tattered Aldous Huxley paperback or publications in French, Hebrew, German, Spanish. From some two hundred photo sessions, about half are represented in the book, and Smolarz worked with fellow artists as well as a wider range of subjects, from nurses to priests, from actors to detectives, across a global scope of locations. While these images are undeniably portraits, their subjects remain hidden until the books final pages, which feature micro biographies of the participants alongside the page number of their ensembles.

The objects selected by each participant are set against white walls, placed on tabletops or arranged on the floor. Gazed at head-on, this spotlight on the objects privileges them as totemic, a shrine to memories and endearments and souvenirs. Many are accompanied by text musings, which strive to be abstractly poetic, often muddling the objects narratives when the enigma of the juxtapositions feels like enough on its own. After all, this is not an empty-your-purse exercisethe emotional weight is evident in the sheer randomness of the objects that obviously transcend what meets the eye. (Samples include a black-and-white Peanuts storyboard starring Lucy, a balloon, pliers, a hospital armband, and a Chilean identity card; a small embroidered handbag, a beaded necklace with an oversized shell, and tiny porcelain receptacles; a black roller skate with pink wheels, a white fossil, and a wooden turtle footrest with a plush pillow shell.) These portraits function as a reexamination of a life, sifting through which causes meaningful experiences to surface and meaningful connections to be concretized via tangible tokens.

Michelle Levy recounts going to the Egyptian Wing at the Metropolitan Museum of Art and feeling mesmerized by the sarcophagi, the lasting legacy of people from eons ago through the items that were buried with them. These people were here, now, she marveledand Smolarzs project perpetuates this gesture as a contemporary analog to an ancient practice, if in life rather than death. It is a visceral thing and primal experience to be in the presence of objects, Levy emphasized, adding that this exercise is one that captured care and identity in a way wholly specific to the individual. At its core, the project is not classically encyclopedic, and one would be remiss to apply any organizing principles on uncategorizable symbolic items that supersede function, pragmatism, need. Each object is treated individually for focus and color correction in post-production, yielding hyper-real resultsas if the objects are even more substantial and tactile thanks to the nostalgia or affection they evoke.

Levy describes Smolarzs endeavor as a personal approach to sociological inquiry. The social consequences of human behavior are not academic sociology but rather sublimated by the spiritual. Smolarz trained as a shaman and is a proponent of three schools of thought: panpsychism (the view that all things have a mind or a mind-like quality), animism (the belief that objects, places, and creatures all possess a distinct spiritual essence, including plants, rivers, and weather systems), and object-oriented ontology (a Heidegger-influenced view that rejects the privileging of human existence over the existence of nonhuman objects). There is something quite exciting in approaching objects as meaningful encounters instead of static clutter. (I think its wonderful to have stuff and live with memories and things you enjoy, the greatand stylishly extravagantIris Apfel once said, who knows a thing or two about interesting objects.) Seeing how others have treated the task of analyzing their own objects spurs a self-reflexive impulse. In a time of both unchecked consumerism and minimalist-aspiring exorcisms, what objects truly matter to us? Its a meaningful question to reflect on and, with a heightened keen eye, you won't look at what surrounds you quite the same way afterwards.

View post:
Elisabeth Smolarz's The Encyclopedia of Things The Brooklyn Rail - Brooklyn Rail

Human Behavior

So you want to integrate OpenAI’s bot. Here’s how that worked for software security scanner Socket – The Register

Exclusive Machine learning models are unreliable but that doesn't prevent them from also being useful at times.

Several months ago, Socket, which makes a freemium security scanner for JavaScript and Python projects, connected OpenAI's ChatGPT model (and more recently its GPT-4 model) to its internal threat feed.

The results, according to CEO Feross Aboukhadijeh, were surprisingly good. "It worked way better than expected," he told The Register in an email. "Now I'm sitting on a couple hundred vulnerabilities and malware packages and we're rushing to report them as quick as we can."

Socket's scanner was designed to detect supply chain attacks. Available as a GitHub app or a command line tool, it scans JavaScript and Python projects in an effort to determine whether any of the many packages that may have been imported from the npm or PyPI registries contain malicious code.

Aboukhadijeh said Socket has confirmed 227 vulnerabilities, all using ChatGPT. The vulnerabilities fall into different categories and don't share common characteristics.

The Register was provided with numerous examples of published packages that exhibited malicious behavior or unsafe practices, including: information exfiltration, SQL injection, hardcoded credentials, potential privilege escalation, and backdoors.

We were asked not to share several examples as they have yet to be removed, but here's one that has already been dealt with.

"There are some interesting effects as well, such as things that a human might be persuaded of but the AI is marking as a risk," Aboukhadijeh added.

"These decisions are somewhat subjective, but the AI is not dissuaded by comments claiming that a dangerous piece of code is not malicious in nature. The AI even includes a humorous comment indicating that it doesnt trust the inline comment."

Aboukhadijeh explained that the software packages at these registries are vast and it's difficult to craft rules that thoroughly plumb the nuances of every file, script, and bit of configuration data. Rules tend to be fragile and often produce too much detail or miss things a savvy human reviewer would catch.

Applying human analysis to the entire corpus of a package registry (~1.3 million for npm and ~450,000 for PyPI) just isn't feasible, but machine learning models can pick up some of the slack by helping human reviewers focus on the more dubious code modules.

"Socket is analyzing every npm and PyPI package with AI-based source code analysis using ChatGPT," said Aboukhadijeh.

"When it finds something problematic in a package, we flag it for review and ask ChatGPT to briefly explain its findings. Like all AI-based tooling, this may produce some false positives, and we are not enabling this as a blocking issue until we gather more feedback on the feature."

Aboukhadijeh provided The Register with a sample report from its ChatGPT helper that identifies risky, though not conclusively malicious behavior. In this instance, the machine learning model offered this assessment, "This script collects sensitive information about the user's system, including username, hostname, DNS servers, and package information, and sends it to an external server."

Screenshot of ChatGPT report for Socket security scanner - Click to enlarge

What a ChatGPT-based Socket advisory looks like ... Click to enlarge

According to Aboukhadijeh, Socket was designed to help developers make informed decisions about risk in a way that doesn't interfere with their work. So raising the alarm about every install script a common attack vector can create too much noise. Analysis of these scripts using a large language model dials the alarm bell down and helps developers recognize real problems. And these models are becoming more capable.

"GPT-4 is a game-changer, capable of replacing static analysis tools as long as all relevant code is within its scope," Aboukhadijeh said.

"In theory, there are no vulnerabilities or security issues it cannot detect, provided the appropriate data is presented to the AI. The main challenge in using AI in this manner is getting the right data to the AI in the right format without accidentally donating millions of dollars to the OpenAI team. :)" as noted below, using these models can be costly.

"Socket is feeding some extra data and processes to help guide GPT-4 in order to make the correct analysis due to GPTs own limitations around character counts, cross file references, capabilities it may have access to, prioritizing analysis, etc," he said.

"Our traditional tools are actually helping to refine the AI just like they may assist a human. In turn, humans can get the benefits of another tool that has increasingly human-like capability but can be run automatically."

This is not to say that large language models cannot be harmful and shouldn't be scrutinized far more than they have been they can and they should. Rather, Socket's experience affirms that ChatGPT and similar models, for all their rough edges, can be genuinely useful, particularly in contexts when the potential harm would be an errant security advisory rather than, say, a discrimination hiring decision or a toxic recipe recommendation.

As open source developer Simon Willison recently noted in a blog post, these large language models enable him to be more ambitious with his projects.

"As an experienced developer, ChatGPT (and GitHub Copilot) save me an enormous amount of 'figuring things out' time," Willison noted. "This doesnt just make me more productive: it lowers my bar for when a project is worth investing time in at all."

Aboukhadijeh acknowledges that ChatGPT is not perfect or even close. It doesn't handle large files well due to the limited context window, he said, and like a human reviewer, it struggles to understand highly obfuscated code. But in both of those situations, more focused scrutiny would be called for, so the model's limitations are not all that meaningful.

Further work, Aboukhadijeh said, needs to be done to make these models more resistant to prompt injection attacks and to better handle cross-file analysis where the pieces of malicious activity may be spread across more than one file.

"If the malicious behavior is sufficiently diffuse then it is harder to pull all the context into the AI at once," he explained. "This is fundamental to all transformer models which have a finite token limit. Our tools try to work within these limits by pulling in different pieces of data into the AIs context."

Integrating ChatGPT and its successor documented here and here into the Socket scanner also turned out to be a financial challenge. According to Aboukhadijeh, one of the biggest obstacles to LLMs is that they're expensive to deploy.

"For us, these costs proved to be the most difficult part of implementing ChatGPT into Socket," he said. "Our initial projections estimated that a full scan of the npm registry would have cost us millions of dollars in API usage. However, with careful work, optimization, and various techniques, we have managed to bring this down to a more sustainable value."

These costs proved to be the most difficult part of implementing ChatGPT into Socket

Asked whether client-side execution might be a way to reduce the cost of running these models, Aboukhadijeh said that doesn't look likely at the moment, but added the AI landscape is changing rapidly.

"The primary challenge with an on-premises system lies not in the need for frequent model updates, but in the costs associated with running these models at scale," he said. "To fully reap the benefits of AI security, it is ideal to use the largest possible model."

"While smaller models like GPT-3 or LLaMA offer some advantages, they are not sufficiently intelligent to consistently detect the most sophisticated malware. Our use of large models inevitably incurs significant costs, but we have invested considerable effort in enhancing efficiency and reducing these expenses. Though we cannot divulge all the specifics, we currently have a patent pending on some of the technologies we have developed for this purpose, and we continue to work on further improvements and cost reductions."

Due to the costs involved, Socket has prioritized making its AI advisories available to paid customers, but the company is also making a basic version available via its website.

"We believe that by centralizing this analysis at Socket, we can amortize the cost of running AI analysis on all our shared open-source dependencies and provide the maximum benefit to the community and protection to our customers, with minimal cost," said Aboukhadijeh.

View original post here:
So you want to integrate OpenAI's bot. Here's how that worked for software security scanner Socket - The Register

Human Behavior

The Science Behind Zombie Viruses and Infections – Health Essentials

Share

Zombie fiction has grown increasingly popular over the last several decades, but the origin of zombie outbreaks varies based on its source material.

In George A. Romeros cult classic Night of the Living Dead, anyone who dies turns into reanimated flesh-eating ghouls. In The Walking Dead, the zombie infestation is linked to an airborne virus that infects everyone, slows down decomposition and reactivates a persons brain stem after theyve died. A bloodborne virus is so potent in 28 Days Later that just one drop of blood or other bodily fluid is enough to send its victims into a frenzy with uncontrollable rage within mere seconds of being infected. And depending on which of the Resident Evil installments youve played, the zombie apocalypse is linked to either a centuries-old fungus or a lab-made virus capable of causing genetic mutations in anyone that comes into contact with it.

After COVID-19, the thought of a widespread pandemic that turns people into zombies is certainly plucked from the deepest corners of our most terrifying nightmares. Scientifically, theres no such thing as a zombie virus. But zombie narratives are often rooted in scientific truth about how infections spread.

Clinical microbiologist Anisha Misra, PhD, explores the science behind zombie lore and explains why everyone is up in arms right now about the potential dangers of fungal infections.

Theres a long list of zombie myths across multiple mediums. Nearly every one of them is rooted in some scientific truth:

The Last of Us is a video game-turned-HBO show in which a widespread zombie apocalypse is started by cordyceps. In the story, cordyceps is a parasitic fungus that takes over your body and causes you to infect others through fungal spores or mycelia (tendrils).

In reality, cordyceps cant infect humans but it is a parasitic fungus that infects specific types of insects in specific geographic areas. In fact, there are more than 750 species of cordyceps and each one targets a specific kind of insect. At least two of those species have potential health benefits for humans. But should we be concerned about a potential human fungal infection from cordyceps?

Its not likely that cordyceps could jump species and infect a human being in the same way the show entertains us with, says Dr. Misra. But it does bring up a valid point: Fungi can develop thermotolerance (resistance to high temperatures) and infect individuals with a higher body temperature.

In fact, this is already happening. Some fungi like Candida auris are causing new and widespread infections, presumably because global warming, higher temperatures and larger populations of people with compromised immune systems are making that more possible.

Because these fungal organisms have been able to adapt and cause infections within humans, theyve become organisms of interest, adds Dr. Misra.

Resident Evil stands out from other zombie lore because it focuses on the idea that a zombie virus can alter or change your genetic code. These alterations then lead to enormous physical mutations that forever change the person infected.

This concept is based in truth, says Dr. Misra. Viruses have a simple structure, so they cant reproduce on their own. They rely on the hosts cell machinery in order to reproduce and make more viruses. Some viruses do this by inserting their own DNA or RNA into our human cells.

But genetic mutations that occur as a result of viruses are far more subtle than zombie fiction will have you believe.

One way to think about it is to imagine each individual cell in your body like a tiny city and the nucleus of each of your cells like its own library that stores books of genetic information (DNA) and functional copies of that information (RNA) that explain how to carry out a number of biological processes.

The goal of any virus is to mass produce copies of itself, but it cant do that on its own so it needs to use libraries (your nuclei) to do the work. Viruses do this in a lot of ways, but a specific kind of virus called a retrovirus makes copies of itself by shoving its own genetic code into healthy, bound volumes of DNA. When your cells grow and multiply, this DNA is then copied over into new cells along with fragments of the retrovirus so that it can continue to be copied beyond its original infection.

And sometimes, a retrovirus will infect a germ cell (a cell that develops into a reproductive cell). When that happens, parts of the retroviral DNA can be passed down into the DNA of your offspring. Over time, what started off as a simple virus becomes a part of your actual genetic code. In fact, about 8% of our human genome is made up of inactive virus fragments.

This has happened over time for millions of years, and there are viruses that infect and integrate into our human genome, says Dr. Misra.

Some retroviruses that have the capability of altering your genetic code include:

Its important to note that while these retroviruses have lasting effects, theyre preventable and there are different treatment options for each, including vaccines, antibiotics, pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) and over-the-counter medication that can help with symptoms.

One common thread in all zombie fiction is how infections have an effect on your brain but are there any real-world infections that impact your ability to think clearly?

Some viruses, bacteria, parasites and fungi have the ability to cause inflammation in and around the brain, especially if theyre left untreated.

When you develop meningitis, the area known as the meninges surrounding your brain and spinal cord becomes inflamed. This can lead to confusion, lack of energy, lack of appetite, hallucinations and difficulty with focus and attention.

You can also develop encephalitis, which is similar but causes inflammation in your brain itself. Encephalitis causes changes in behavior, confusion, difficulty speaking or moving, issues with memory, and seizures. The most common cause of encephalitis are viruses that include:

With encephalitis, symptoms tend to start out pretty mild but they can result in confusion, agitation or hallucinations, states Dr. Misra. It can also result in a loss of consciousness, including comas because it affects a specific region in your brain.

The rabies virus (RABV) is another thats perhaps the most well-known virus to cause behavioral changes and lead to a fatal infection. This virus spreads through a break in your skin that comes into contact with the spit (saliva) of an infected animal, most often from a bite. Once bitten, you can get a vaccine that stops the infection. But if youre not treated right away, you could experience symptoms that include:

Once the rabies virus reaches the brain, your symptoms progress through cerebral dysfunction, explains Dr. Misra. Once these clinical signs appear, the disease is nearly always fatal.

An infection caused by a zombie virus usually leads to increased decay and cell death, much like necrotizing fasciitis. In reality, necrotizing fasciitis is a flesh-eating disease that affects your muscle fascia (thin, connective tissue) under the surface of your skin and causes those tissues to die. Most often, this condition is caused by bacteria that get into your body through a break in your skin like a cut, scrape, burn or other wound.

These organisms spread very quickly, warns Dr. Misra. If youre not treated quickly with antibiotics, or the infected tissue isnt removed, you can go into a toxic shock-like syndrome that can result in sepsis and organ failure.

When you first develop this condition, the affected area may feel hot to the touch or have a burning sensation. You then develop pustules that start necrotizing or dying off, causing your skin to turn black.

Necrotizing fasciitis doesnt spread from human-to-human skin contact, but through inoculation of your skin, says Dr. Misra. That means that if you touch the infected area, you likely wont contract the infection. For the infection to spread from one person to another, the bacteria have to enter your body through an open wound.

Zombie fans familiar with 28 Days Later will remember an iconic scene in which one person gets infected by a single drop of blood that falls into their eye and thats all it takes to infect them within seconds.

Is it possible a single drop of blood could cause infection? Yes, but a lot of things would have to align in order for that to happen, says Dr. Misra. That drop of blood would have to have enough infectious particles in it in order to infect another person and the infection wouldnt spread that quickly. But if that person was immunocompromised, their chances of getting infected would be even higher.

That said, anytime healthcare providers are working with blood or other body fluid, they take necessary precautions by wearing gloves, glasses, gowns and other protective equipment to protect from possible infection. If someone were to get exposed, theyre given immediate treatment in the form of antibiotics or vaccines and tested for several potential infections like hepatitis B and HIV.

It depends on how quickly you act and on the pathogen itself, Dr. Misra continues, but a drop of blood is normally not enough to cause an infection.

You cant have zombies if you cant bring back the dead. While thats scientifically impossible (at least for now) one study is pushing the boundaries between life and death.

Yale researchers were able to restore function to cells across multiple organs in pigs that were dead for more than one hour in an effort to revive those organs after death. The results are promising, particularly in the area of organ transplants.

Currently, we transplant organs after brain death because were still able to circulate blood to keep those organs healthy, Dr. Misra explains. But in cases of sudden cardiac arrest (your heart stops beating), blood stops flowing which causes our organs to start deteriorating. If someone dies of a cardiorespiratory death, were not able to use all their organs because by the time were able to collect them, theyve gone through some sort of cell death.

Far more research is needed before this could ever be used in a clinical human trial. But the mere thought of reanimating the dead is compelling, even when you consider its uses outside of zombie fiction.

There was even some cell regeneration that took place, which means we could be collecting organs from these cardiorespiratory deaths and increase our pool up to 20% for transferrable hearts just by using this method, adds Dr. Misra.

But until more research is done, and perhaps policies in place to protect human life, this study only hints at whats possible when we leave behind fiction and begin embracing scientific exploration.

Like anything crossing these thresholds of life and death, it brings up a lot of ethical questions into play as to when we would be able to declare someone dead in order to then be able to transplant their organs, notes Dr. Misra. But its an extremely interesting study because of the magnitude of its potential for humans.

Regardless of the origin of infection and how these scientific truths inspire a multitude of zombie stories, its important to remember that a lot of infections caused by viruses, bacteria, parasites and fungi are preventable and treatable if caught early enough. If you ever do experience symptoms or are concerned, talk to a healthcare provider instead of waiting it out. Its always better to be safe than sorry.

More here:
The Science Behind Zombie Viruses and Infections - Health Essentials

Human Behavior

What Human Behavior Tells Us About How To Get Hybrid Work Right – Forbes

Reactionary Rulemaking

Unsplash

I once transferred to a school that had a strange and in-your-face rule: No Climbing Trees.

And not just when on school grounds; as long as you attended, it was No Climbing Trees Ever.

This rule had two unintended psychological effects.

First, I now wanted to climb a lot more trees than I had my whole life. And second, I hated the administration.

The rule came about (I investigated) because a student once broke his foot climbing a tree. To prevent future headaches, the powers-that-be made a blanket rule.

Now, as far as I'm aware, there aren't a lot of peer-reviewed studies on the benefits of climbing trees, but this rule simultaneously prohibited something potentially positive (clean fun/exploration/nature/exercise) and created animositymaking it potentially more difficult for the school to get my cooperation on other, weightier matters.

Lately, when I consult with organizations about teamworkor read articles about the difficulties of hybrid work like this one in last week's New York TimesI have thought about the No Climbing Trees era of my young life.

Remote work was a well-meaning reaction to the dire circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic. There are clear benefits to working from anywhere, many of which, we've discovered, are still benefits in a non-pandemic situation.

But now that the pandemic has largely stabilized, many businesses want the benefits of in-person work back.

It's like for two years leaders said, "Go ahead! Climb trees! It's good exercise!" But now, they would like us to not be in trees and be in an office sometimes.

Some organizations have reacted with a blanket rule: No Remote Work Anymore.

And given that working remotely has even more benefits than climbing trees, it's easy to see why the human reactions of "I never wanted to work from home so badly as now" and "I hate this company" have come on so strongly.

Seeing some companies step in this cow pie, many leaders have opted for Hybrid Work policies. The rationale is that we can have the best of both worlds, and workers will be happier. And in the right circumstances, this is exactly the case. But from a psychology standpoint, many leaders who attempt this are actually tromping on the same turd.

Most Hybrid Work policies I've seen are the equivalent of "No Climbing Trees, Except Sometimes" or "Only Climb Trees 2 Days A Week Or Else." With these kinds of rules, even if workers understand the benefits to the company of some in-person work, nanny-style rules make workers tend to feel like they're being restricted because of someone else's incompetence.

And this reinforces a negative trust loop in their employers.

After all, the ticker tape in the back of your head will say, if your boss truly trusted you, she wouldn't need to put in rules that make you feel like a kid. She'd assume you'll use good judgment and decide when it's best to work remotely and when in-person will benefit your work and your team.

The solution for leaders who don't want to think too hard, or who see clear benefits to only one type of work, is to make a 100% Remote or a 100% In-Person policy and leave it at that. Some people will not like it. But you won't have to relitigate the issue. And perhaps the cost in some areas of your team (in terms of productivity, resentment) is worth it to you.

This is like the Abstinence method of addiction recovery. Never again. No room for misinterpretation. For better or worse. And I think this is a bargain worth making in some cases. If you never ever ever slip up (or never have an important reason to bend the rule).

The worst solution, I believe, is to create hard-and-fast rules that are easy to justify good reasons to violate them.

A hard rule of two days a week in-person might seem like a perkflexibility!but it can be like an alcoholic deciding only to drink two drinks a week. It works, until you have a lapsewhich is easy to do in the absence of training or well-established habits. After a lapse, as the psychology of the abstinence violation effect shows us, it's very easy for people to get into an "all is lost" mentality. It's your husband's birthday, so you have that third drink. Oops. Then you say, "screw it." You're drinking all weekend. Future You can pick up the pieces.

When this happens at work (e.g. someone has a good reason to come in only one day this week), the boss is left to decide how to deal with the violationor else they risk the rest of the team concluding the rule has no teeth.

Or perhaps worse, they're seen as playing favorites.

And suddenly, the well-meaning hybrid work policy has become more of a headache than it might be worth.

The solution for leaders who want the benefits of both Remote and In-Person is to do what successful anti-substance-abuse training programs do. Instead of telling students to "just say no" and leaving them to fend for themselves when high-pressure situations arise (plus risking an abstinence violation effect), as Scientific American reports, effective anti-drug programs "involve substantial amounts of interaction between instructors and students. They teach students the social skills they need to refuse drugs and give them opportunities to practice these skills with other students."

Instead of banning all tree climbingor not banning it and letting untrained tree-climbers risk their safetyit's more effective to coach people how to safely navigate the ins and outs of climbing trees, how to make wise climbing decisions, or how to use a buddy system to stay safe when you go out exploring.

Likewise, instead of just banning Remote work, or just placing headache-inducing Hybrid rules in place, effective leaders need to spend time with their team members training on how to manage their work in tricky situations.

They need to train them in social and team skills that help them identify how best to pull through for their teammatesand how to help each other navigate work-life integration.

They need to train teams to develop benevolence-based trust and charity-based conflict resolution skills.

They need to ditch easy-but-backfiring rules for more empowering principles.

All of this takes more time and thinking than posting a "No Climbing Trees Ever" sign. But for those of us who are convinced of the benefits of remote work flexibility, it's time and thinking well spent.

Shane Snow is a bestselling author, keynote speaker, and CEO. If you liked this post, subscribe to Shane's Substack, or check out his interactive courses on modern leadership skills.

Journalist covering innovation and human behavior, media-tech entrepreneur, and the bestselling author of three books, including Dream Teams: Working Together Without Falling Apart.

Excerpt from:
What Human Behavior Tells Us About How To Get Hybrid Work Right - Forbes

Human Behavior

Theresa Welles named new director of Penn State Psychological … – Pennsylvania State University

Welles spent five years at Anxiety Specialists of Atlanta, where she started as a staff psychologist before being promoted to clinical director. During her tenure as director, the practice, which specializes in anxiety spectrum disorders, obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD), and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), doubled in size.

Shes proud of her time there and grateful to have worked with such a talented group of clinicians, and for all that she learned while navigating the unique challenges created as the result of the COVID-19 pandemic.

While the pandemic was challenging, some of the innovations that came out of it, like telemedicine, have been amazing, and were not only great for some patients, but to some extent better from a business perspective as well, Welles said. And I think its important to identify and get stakeholders behind some of the incredible technology out there that streamlines important documentation such as billing, clinical notes, and scheduling, and allows more efficient use of staff, faculty, and student time -- which ultimately benefits the patients.

We are truly at a crossroads when it comes to mental health, she added. The stigma in many ways has been lifted, and the need for mental health services has been highlighted everywhere, from professional sports to the entertainment industry, and younger generations are much more accepting of psychological therapy than ever before. People appreciate us, but were still under-resourced. So, being a part of a program that is contributing so much in terms of research and training is incredibly exciting, and aligns with my lifelong commitment to advocate for mental health parity in the medical industry.

Welles has been fascinated by human behavior for as long as she can remember. While an undergraduate, she took a psychology course that inspired her to pursue it as a career. Among other things, she loved that the field was a combination of science, medicine, and philosophy, as one of her professors described it while she was pursuing her doctorate in counseling psychology and school psychology at Florida State University.

Earlier in her career, Welles served as module lead of behavioral health at Kaiser Permanente Gwinnett Comprehensive Medical Center, an experience that led her to highly value the importance of collaborative care, which she believes is the future of behavioral health medicine. And her experiences in higher education, including serving as the assistant director of counseling and psychological services at 40,000-student Kennesaw State University in the Atlanta metro area, have prepared her well for the challenges of her new position.

Im a very analytical person, and can be introverted at times, but I really value connecting with other people and find helping people, in any way, incredibly rewarding, Welles said. And Im a huge believer in the importance of a liberal arts education and am excited our program is housed in that college at Penn State. Psychology is the science of human behavior its entire focus is on the human experience, making it generalizable to just about any chosen career, whether youre a teacher, an anthropologist, a lawyer, an artist, or a stockbroker.

Welles and her husband have four children, including one who will begin attending Penn State later this year. Though it was difficult leaving her patients and colleagues in Atlanta, shes incredibly excited about this new professional and personal chapter in her life.

Im really grateful to be working with such an incredible group of people, she said. Being able to be part of the clinical psychology programs future, and continuing to support a psychological clinic of excellence, where science and practice come together thats very exciting to me. I cant wait to get started.

Continue reading here:
Theresa Welles named new director of Penn State Psychological ... - Pennsylvania State University

Human Behavior

What dogs do when humans are not around, according to experts – Salon

The human-dog bond is ancient: we have co-evolved together since before writing even existed. Our long cohabitation with dogs has granted both species a unique insight into the other's feelings: dogs, for instance, know when you are looking into their eyes, unlike wolves and other animals. And, dogs can understand human language to some extent: one "Guiness"-worthy dog knows over 1,000 nouns.

Yet for all our mutual insights, we can't truly see inside the mind of a dog nor can we know for sure what they're thinking, or what they do when we're not looking. And while cameras that watch our pets can reveal what they are doing, it's harder to know what they're thinking in private. What can dog owners know for sure?

When they are not peacefully snoozing, dogs may also engage in what is known as "vigilant behavior" performing their self-assigned duty of guarding your home.

First, we know that they do indeed miss their humans.MRI tests of dogs' brainsconfirm that dogs associate the sounds and smells of their preferred humans with positive rewards. Because dogs are intelligent and perceptive about their environment, they quickly figure out patterns that indicate a human is about to leave e.g., picking up their keys, walking toward the door and clearly communicate feelings of distress when that happens. When secretly recorded, dogs who are alone in their homes often spend time at the door where their preferred human left, quite likely hoping they will soon return.

Yet if your heart aches at the thought that your dog does nothing but emotionally suffer while you are gone, rest at ease. There is plenty of research on domestic canine behavior and we know that, in addition to missing you, dogs routinely take naps.

"Previous research has demonstrated that dogs mostly spend their time resting when the owner is gone," Dr. Erica N. Feuerbacher, anAssociate Professor at Virginia Tech'sDepartment of Animal & Poultry Science, told Salon by email. When they are not peacefully snoozing, dogs may also engage in what is known as "vigilant behavior" performing their self-assigned duty of guarding your home "likely when they hear or see something outside, like a car or someone walking down the sidewalk."

When they are neither tired nor on alert, dogs may occupy themselves with play. This is why humans may return home to find their property damaged.

Want more health and science stories in your inbox? Subscribe toSalon's weekly newsletter The Vulgar Scientist.

"Of course some dogs engage in behaviors that are probably less desirable to their owners, like counter surfing or getting into the trash or vocalizing," Feuerbacher explained."Some dogs do develop separation anxiety which is a severe behavioral issue; other dogs are simply bored or take advantage of the owner not being there to explore places (like the counter) where they are usually forbidden from. But if they find something good up there to eat, that behavior will continue to happen."

It is important to remember that dogs, like humans, have quirks specific to their individual personalities. As such, anticipating their solitary behavior can be unpredictable.

"What dogs do when we are not around also depends on the individual, age, location and even the quality of relationship we share with them," Dr. Monique Udell, an associate professor who specializes in human-animal bonding atOregon State University, told Salon by email. Puppies, for instance, are more likely to get into mischief because they are biologically programmed to spend more of their time in activities like exploring and teething.Younger dogs can also experience more frequent bathroom problems, similar to older dogs.

"Puppies, whose bodies are still developing, as well as older dogs who may be experiencing health problems or cognitive decline, are often less likely to be able to avoid urinating or defecating when left alone for longer periods of alone time," Udell pointed out. "Dogs with separation anxiety experience greater than normal distress when left alone, and may panic or try to escape, which can result in injury or damage to property." LikeFeuerbacher, however, Udell emphasized that dogs spend most of their solitary time sleeping, and that this is healthy as long as the rest of their environment is sufficiently stimulating.

"Owners who have high expectations of their dogs and are highly responsive to their dog's needs are more likely to raise secure dogs."

"One important thing concerned humans can do, is make sure that the time they do spend with their dogs is quality time," Udell explained. "Dogs with secure attachment bonds to their owner are also less likely to display separation anxiety when their owner is away. Owners who have high expectations of their dogs (engage in positive reinforcement training, have consistent rules) and are highly responsive to their dog's needs (provide attention, recognize and respond when their dog is scared or sick) are more likely to raise secure dogs."

While dogs need their rest and therefore benefit from some time away from their humans, that does not mean all dogs will naturally accept that isolation. Fortunately, asFeuerbacher tells Salon, there are ways to train dogs to be as okay with temporary separation from you as you are from them.

"First, owners should work on their dog tolerating being left alone," Feuerbacher explained."Dogs are social animals so the owner leaving can be upsetting to the dog. You can do this by practicing lots of short departures, like running out to check the mail and coming back in, gardening for a few minutes and coming back in, taking a quick trip to the grocery store. This is especially useful when you bring a new dog home."

It can also be helpful to leave dogs with toys and other enrichment items bones, stuffed animals, chew devices, and so on. Finally, one should make sure to either paper train dogs or ask someone to take your dog out for a walk periodically if their humans will be gone for a while. It is cruel to expect the dog to hold in their excrement for too long. After all, while "The Secret Life of Pets" is not scientifically accurate, the essential point of the story that dogs lead rich lives separate from their humans, and should be respected as such is certainly true.

"While [the movie] might be fictional, I hope it does help folks recognize that their animals lead very rich lives, with their own interests like smelling certain smells, or getting to visit a dog friend," Feuerbacher told Salon."This also comes into play when we are interacting with our dogs we might want them to sit or do some other behavior we want, but it's worth remembering they have their own interests (such as smelling a certain patch of grass!) that doesn't align with what I want them to do."

Read the rest here:
What dogs do when humans are not around, according to experts - Salon

Human Behavior

Animal personalities can trip up science, but theres a solution – The Hindu

Several years ago, Christian Rutz started to wonder whether he was giving his crows enough credit. Rutz, a biologist at the University of St. Andrews in Scotland, and his team were capturing wild New Caledonian crows and challenging them with puzzles made from natural materials before releasing them again.In one test, birds faced a log drilled with holes that contained hidden food, and could get the food out by bending a plant stem into a hook. If a bird didnt try within 90 minutes, the researchers removed it from the dataset.

But, Rutz says, he soon began to realize he was not, in fact, studying the skills of New Caledonian crows. He was studying the skills of only a subset of New Caledonian crows that quickly approached a weird log theyd never seen before maybe because they were especially brave, or reckless.

The team changed their protocol. They began giving the more hesitant birds an extra day or two to get used to their surroundings, then trying the puzzle again. It turns out that many of these retested birds suddenly start engaging, Rutz says. They just needed a little bit of extra time.

Scientists are increasingly realizing that animals, like people, are individuals. They have distinct tendencies, habits and life experiences that may affect how they perform in an experiment. That means, some researchers argue, that much published research on animal behavior may be biased. Studies claiming to show something about a species as a whole that green sea turtles migrate a certain distance, say, or how chaffinches respond to the song of a rival may say more about individual animals that were captured or housed in a certain way, or that share certain genetic features. Thats a problem for researchers who seek to understand how animals sense their environments, gain new knowledge and live their lives.

The samples we draw are quite often severely biased, Rutz says. This is something that has been in the air in the community for quite a long time.

In 2020, Rutz and his colleague Michael Webster, also at the University of St. Andrews, proposed a way to address this problem. They called it STRANGE.

Why STRANGE? In 2010, anarticlein Behavioral and Brain Sciencessuggested that the people studied in much of published psychology literature are WEIRD drawn from Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich and Democratic societies and are among the least representative populations one could find for generalizing about humans. Researchers might draw sweeping conclusions about the human mind when really theyve studied only the minds of, say, undergraduates at the University of Minnesota.

A decade later, Rutz and Webster, drawing inspiration from WEIRD, published a paper in the journal Naturecalled How STRANGE are your study animals?

They proposed that their fellow behavior researchers consider several factors about their study animals, which they termed Social background, Trappability and self-selection, Rearing history, Acclimation and habituation, Natural changes in responsiveness, Genetic makeup, and Experience.

I first began thinking about these kinds of biases when we were using mesh minnow traps to collect fish for experiments, Webster says. He suspected and thenconfirmed in the labthat more active sticklebacks were more likely to swim into these traps. We now try to use nets instead, Webster says, to catch a wider variety of fish.

Thats Trappability. Other factors that might make an animal more trappable than its peers, besides its activity level, include a bold temperament, a lack of experience or simply being hungrier for bait.

Other research has shown that pheasants housed in groups of fiveperformed betteron a learning task (figuring out which hole contained food) than those housed in groups of only three thats Social background. Jumpingspidersraised in captivity wereless interested in preythan wild spiders (Rearing history), and honeybeeslearned bestin the morning (Natural changes in responsiveness). And so on.

It might be impossible to remove every bias from a group of study animals, Rutz says. But he and Webster want to encourage other scientists to think through STRANGE factors with every experiment, and to be transparent about how those factors might have affected their results.

We used to assume that we could do an experiment the way we do chemistry by controlling a variable and not changing anything else, says Holly Root-Gutteridge, a postdoctoral researcher at the University of Lincoln in the United Kingdom who studies dog behavior. But research has been uncoveringindividual patterns of behavior scientists sometimes call it personality in all kinds of animals, from monkeys tohermit crabs.

Just because we havent previously given animals the credit for their individuality or distinctiveness doesnt mean that they dont have it, Root-Gutteridge says.

This failure of human imagination, or empathy, mars some classic experiments, Root-Gutteridge and coauthors noted in a2022 paperfocused on animal welfare issues. For example, experiments by psychologist Harry Harlow in the 1950s involved baby rhesus macaques and fake mothers made from wire. They allegedly gave insight into how human infants form attachments. But given that these monkeys were torn from their mothers and kept unnaturally isolated, are the results really generalizable, the authors ask? Or do Harlows findings apply only to his uniquely traumatized animals?

All this individual-based behavior, I think this is very much a trend in behavioral sciences, says Wolfgang Goymann, a behavioral ecologist at the Max Planck Institute for Biological Intelligence and editor-in-chief of Ethology. The journal officiallyadoptedthe STRANGE framework in early 2021, after Rutz, who is one of the journals editors, suggested it to the board.

Goymann didnt want to create new hoops for already overloaded scientists to jump through. Instead, the journal simply encourages authors to include a few sentences in their methods and discussion sections, Goymann says, addressing how STRANGE factors might bias their results (or how theyve accounted for those factors).

We want people to think about how representative their study actually is, Goymann says.

Several other journals have recently adopted the STRANGE framework, and since their 2020 paper Rutz and Webster have run workshops, discussion groups and symposia at conferences. Its grown into something that is bigger than we can run in our spare time, Rutz says. We are excited about it, really excited, but we had no idea it would take off in the way it did.

His hope is that widespread adoption of STRANGE will lead to findings in animal behavior that are more reliable. The problem of studies that cant be replicated has lately received much attention in certain other sciences, human psychology in particular.

Psychologist Brian Nosek, executive director of the Center for Open Science in Charlottesville, Virginia and a coauthor of the 2022 paper Replicability, Robustness, and Reproducibility in Psychological Science in the Annual Review of Psychology, says animal researchers face similar challenges to those who focus on human behavior. If my goal is to estimate human interest in surfing and I conduct my survey on a California beach, I am not likely to get an estimate that generalizes to humanity, Nosek says. When you conduct a replication of my survey in Iowa, you may not replicate my finding.

The ideal approach, Nosek says, would be to gather a study sample thats truly representative, but that can be difficult and expensive. The next best alternative is to measure and be explicit about how the sampling strategy may be biased, he says.

Thats just what Rutz hopes STRANGE will achieve. If researchers are more transparent and thoughtful about the individual characteristics of the animals theyre studying, he says, others might be better able to replicate their work and be sure the lessons theyre taking away from their study animals are meaningful, and not quirks of experimental setups. Thats the ultimate goal.

In his own crow experiments, he doesnt know whether giving shyer birds extra time has changed his overarching results. But it did give him a larger sample size, which can mean more statistically robust results. And, he says, if studies are better designed, it could mean that fewer animals need to be caught in the wild or tested in the lab to reach firm conclusions. Overall, he hopes that STRANGE will be a win for animal welfare.

In other words, whats good for science could also be good for the animals seeing them not as robots, Goymann says, but as individual beings that also have a value in themselves.

Read more:
Animal personalities can trip up science, but theres a solution - The Hindu

Human Behavior

Droughts bring disease: Here are four ways they do it – Phys.org

Credit: Riccardo Mayer / Shutterstock

Countries in the Horn of Africa have been hit by a multiyear drought. Ethiopia, Kenya, Somalia and Uganda are expected to continue getting below-normal rainfall in 2023. Excluding Uganda, 36.4 million people are affected and 21.7 million are in need of food assistance.

Climate change projections show changes in temperature and rainfall extremes, especially without emissions reductions. Some parts of Africa are projected to become wetter and others drier. Prolonged dry spells, particularly in semi-arid and arid regions, may have serious impacts, particularly if people aren't prepared.

Droughts can have wide-ranging implications for the affected population. The decreased availability of wateroften accompanied by high temperaturescan increase the risk of contamination, cause dehydration and result in an inability to wash and maintain hygiene practices.

Droughts can have an impact on non-resistant crops and livestock, causing malnutrition and food insecurity. The economic implications of agricultural losses can go on to affect mental health, gender-based violence and poverty.

The changes to the environment and human behavior caused by drought can also lead to higher exposure to disease-causing organisms. It can increase the risk of infections and disease outbreaks. Diseases that are spread through food, water, insects and other animals can all break out during times of drought and often overlap. Understanding and managing the known risk factors for these outbreaks, and how drought can exacerbate them, is important in preventing infectious disease mortality during drought.

During droughts there can be changes in what kinds of food are accessible, as less water is available to produce and process it. Food insecurity can lead to malnutrition, which has an impact on immunity. Certain foods may become less available and it may not be possible to reduce food contamination via traditional methods of acidification such as lemon juice, curdled milk, tamarind and vinegar.

Food insecurity can lead to an increased reliance on roadside food vendors. Food vendors are often linked to food-borne disease outbreaks as hygiene standards can vary widely and are often poorly regulated. Cooking fuel, particularly wood, may be in short supply, so food may be eaten cold, raw or without re-heating, increasing the chances of contamination.

Food-borne diseases linked to droughts include cholera, dysentery, salmonella and hepatitis A and E. But any food-borne pathogen can be a risk during times of water scarcity.

The impact of drought on water availability also affects water-borne pathogens. It can change the environment and human behavior in ways that increase transmission risks, similar to food-borne diseases.

During times of limited water resources, a pathogen can become more concentrated in the environment, particularly when higher temperatures suit its growth. IPC v Acute Food Insecurity Phase. Credit: The Famine Early Warning Systems Network

Risky water use behaviors may increase. People might use water sources they would normally avoid, and reduce hand-washing.

Water-borne diseases linked to droughts include cholera, dysentery, typhoid and rotavirus.

Breeding sites for vectors such as mosquitoes may be reduced during drought because there is less groundwater for females to lay their eggs. But new areas may be created. Droughts can lead to an increase in potable water, due to stockpiling or the delivery of water aid to households from the government or NGOs. If water containers are open, this can create ideal vector breeding grounds. Open containers may also move the vector breeding groundand therefore the vectorcloser to the household.

Changes in temperature and water can affect egg and larval survival and intermediate or animal host transmission, helping the pathogen to survive longer. Higher temperature can affect vector behavior, mainly biting frequency and timing of feeding, altering transmission.

Vector-borne diseases linked to droughts include West Nile virus, St Louis encephalitis, Rift Valley fever, chikungunya and dengue.

Zoonotic diseases are those that can be transmitted from animals to humans. Water scarcity increases the pressure on water sources, and so water is used for several purposes and may be shared by livestock, wildlife and people. Interactions between humans, livestock and wildlife increase, expanding the opportunity for contact and disease transmission. Food supply issues and agricultural losses may also increase reliance on bushmeat for food and income, which can be a risk for zoonotic disease spillover.

Recent examples of zoonotic disease spillover include Nipah virus, Ebola and monkeypox (recently renamed mpox).

At an individual level, education around disease risks is important. This will allow people to make informed choices to protect their health to the best of their abilities. Household water should be covered. And personal and food hygiene should be maintained as much as possible.

To prevent drought-related disease outbreaks, pre-existing vulnerability (poverty, access to water, education) needs to be addressed. It is not the drought that causes the outbreak, but instead how society deals with these dry conditions.

Better water resource management is needed at a regional and international level, to treat large water sources as a common resource for all. Authorities need to act to provide drought assistance. This includes safe water to prevent the use of poor quality water sources, and agricultural and food aid to mitigate dehydration and malnutrition.

Excerpt from:
Droughts bring disease: Here are four ways they do it - Phys.org

Human Behavior

Annual Shaw Biology Lecture to feature New York Times best … – University of Southern Indiana

The University of Southern Indiana will host its 9th annual Shaw Biology Lecture at 7 p.m. Monday, April 17 in Mitchell Auditorium, located in the Nursing and Health Professions Building. Frans de Wall, New York Times bestselling author, will present Politics, Cognition, Morality: You Name It Our Fellow Primates Have It All. The presentation is open to the public at no charge.

De Waal is a C.H. Candler Professor Emeritus of Psychology at Emory University, and is former Director of Living Links, a division of the Yerkes National Primate Research Center, established for primate studies to shed light on human behavioral evolution. A Dutch/American biologist, de Waal is known for his work on the behavior and social intelligence of primates.

In 2011, Discover Magazine named him among the 47 (All Time) Great Minds of Science and in 2019, Prospect Magazine ranked him fourth for the Worlds Top Thinkers. His scientific work has been published in hundreds of articles and journals, such as Science and Nature, and volumes specialized in animal behavior. His dozen popular books, translated into over 20 languages, made him one of the worlds most visible primatologists.

De Waals bestsellers include Are We Smart Enough to Know How Smart Animals Are? and Mamas Last Hug. His latest book is titled Different: Gender Through the Eyes of a Primatologist. Following his presentation, de Waal will be available for a book signing.

The Shaw Lecture Series is funded by a USI Foundation endowment with support by the USI Biology Department and the Pott College of Science, Engineering, and Education.

For questions, contact Dr. Marlene Shaw, Professor Emerita of Biology,at mshaw@usi.edu.

Read more from the original source:
Annual Shaw Biology Lecture to feature New York Times best ... - University of Southern Indiana