Computers in Human Behavior Reports is an open access scholarly journal dedicated to examining human computer interactions and impact of computers on human behavior from diverse interdisciplinary angles. As a companion journal to Computers in Human Behavior (CHB), CHB Reports is a forum for both theoretical and practical implications of human-centered computing.
See original here:
Computers in Human Behavior Reports | Journal - ScienceDirect
Case Studies
Preface
Acknowledgments
PART I A MULTIDIMENSIONAL APPROACH FOR MULTIFACETED SOCIAL WORK
Chapter 1. Human Behavior: A Multidimensional Approach
Elizabeth Hutchison, Cory Cummings, Leanne Charlesworth
Chapter 2. Theoretical Perspectives on Human Behavior
Stephen Gilson
Joseph Walsh
Joseph Walsh
PART II THE MULTIPLE DIMENSIONS OF PERSON
Chapter 3. The Biological Person
Michael Sheridan
Chapter 4. The Psychological Person: Cognition, Emotion, and Self
Elizabeth Hutchison, Linwood Cousins
Chapter 5. The Psychosocial Person: Relationships, Stress, and Coping
Chapter 6. The Spiritual Person
Elizabeth Cramer
PART III THE MULTIPLE DIMENSIONS OF ENVIRONMENT
Chapter 7. The Physical Environment
Chapter 8. Cultures
Chapter 9. Social Structure and Social Institutions: Global and National
Chapter 10. Families
Chapter 11. Small Groups
Chapter 12. Formal Organizations
Chapter 13. Communities
Read more here:
Dimensions of Human Behavior | SAGE Publications Inc
KYOTO, Japan Have you ever caught a dog giving you a strange look after you make a mistake? It turns out theyre quietly judging you and your apparent incompetence, at least if theyre female, a new study reveals.
Researchers in Japan have found that female dogs judge people after watching them make an error or act in an incompetent manner. While the team examined how both male and female dogs reacted to watching people either act competently or incompetently, results show females stare longer and approach humans who appear competent while opening a container of food.
Dogs are highly sensitive to human behavior, and they evaluate us using both their direct experiences and from a third-party perspective, researchers write in the journal Behavioural Processes.Dogs pay attention to various aspects of our actions and make judgments about, for example, social vs. selfish acts.
To test how dogs react to people making mistakes, 30 canines sat in front of two actors. Each person had a container of food with a lid on it. The competent human easily opened the container. Meanwhile, the incompetent human struggled to get the lid off.
After recording this experiment, the team found that female dogs stared at the competent human significantly longer than their male counterparts. They were also more likely to approach the clever human who could get the lid off. Study authors believe this shows female dogs can recognize when a person is competent, and that this judgement influences their behavior.
Simply put, female dogs see a smart human and want to be around them, while avoiding their dimmer friends who cant even open a jar.
This result suggests that dogs can recognize different competence levels in humans, and that this ability influences their behavior according to the first situation. Our data also indicate that more attention should be given to potential sex differences in dogs social evaluation abilities, the researchers conclude.
Read more here:
Female dogs judge their owners when they're incompetent - Study Finds
Marlene Zuk is an evolutionary biologist and a professor of biology at the University of Minnesota, where she researches animal behavior.
Below, Marlene shares 5 key insights from her new book, Dancing Cockatoos and the Dead Man Test: How Behavior Evolves and Why it Matters. Listen to the audio versionread by Marlene herselfin the Next Big Idea App.
When people think about behavior in either humans or animals, they often want to know if that behavior is genetic or whether its learned. Thats especially true when headlines are full of declarations like Our politics are in our DNA.
This is the old nature-nurture debate. Traits as complex as intelligence or aggression have to be affected by both genes and the environment. And yet, we keep resurrecting this notion of it being nature or nurture. The nature-nurture controversy has become a zombie idea that keeps springing back to life but deserves to die once and for all.
The problem is that if people genuinely believe that, for example, men will always grow up with dominating tendencies because its in their genes, then interventions to prevent aggression are worthless. In reality, its the interplay, the entanglement, between genes and environment thats important.
We can illustrate that with a human disorder thats often called a genetic disease, phenylketonuria (PKU). Its screened for in infants with a heel prick at birth. Babies with two copies of a defective gene cannot properly metabolize the amino acid phenylalanine, which then builds up in the bloodstream, leading to severe intellectual disability. Seems obviously genetic, right? Nopeit turns out that if these babies are given a special diet, then they develop normally, so one could argue that the disease is environmental. The interaction of genes and the environ-ment is what matters. The outcome of whether the child grows up intellectually disabled or not depends on which diet they receive only if they have the defective genes.
A greater cause cannot be ascribed to genes or environment. And thats true for all traits. Next time you read that theres a gene for a behavior, whether its dog ownership or intelligence, think zombie.
Many people have tried connecting brain size and intelligence, with the assumption that a big brain is a prerequisite for complex or flexible behavior. But few have drawn this comparison out to its logical conclusion: are there animals that are so tiny that they are almost too stupid to live or do complicated tasks?
To figure this out, a scientist named William Eberhard studied extremely small spiders (including one kind that weighs less than a milligram) or about as much as an inch of sewing thread. Yet the spiders still produce orb webs, the silky wheel that entraps their even tinier prey. Eberhard measured whether the difficult process of weaving and adjusting a web was more of a challenge to the minuscule spiders than to three other kinds of spiders that weighed anywhere from 10 to 10,000 times more. The small spiders are just as capable as larger ones.
How do they manage that? Some tiny species cram brain tissue into places where it is not usually found, like into their legs, giving, as Eberhard and his colleague Bill Wcislo say, new meaning to the phrase thinking on your feet. This begs the question of how little tissue is required to run an animal at all, since nerve cells are limited by the laws of physics in how small they can become. Recent work suggests that the tiny spiders reduce neuron size and increase their relative brain size, so they have essentially equal numbers of neurons compared with larger orb weavers.
All nervous systems, and all brains, are success stories; you cant draw conclusions simply based on size. This should make us wary of generalizing intelligence, and what is meant by intelligenceespecially in insects. Insects have surprisingly large behavioral repertoires given their small brains, with flexibility that rivals that of some vertebrates. Maybe the question should be not how insects do so much with tiny brains, but why vertebrates bother with big ones?
Dr. Stephen Lea is a brave man. An emeritus professor of psychology at the University of Exeter in England, he published a paper with Britta Osthaus titled, In what sense are dogs special? The conclusion was that they arent.
The reception to their work was not appreciative. Your Dog Is Probably Dumber Than You Think, a New Study Says, smirked a typical headline from Time magazine. Lea tried to pacify the dog people in an interview by saying, Dog cognition may not be exceptional, but dogs are certainly exceptional cognitive research subjects. No one seemed placated.
The study didnt show that dogs were stupid. It asked whether they were smarter than you would expect. To answer this, Lea and Osthaus picked three groups for comparison. First, they looked at other species that are related to dogs evolutionarilymembers of the group Carnivora, meaning meat-eaters, including African wild dogs and cats. Then, they considered dogs as social hunters, alongside dolphins and chimpanzees. Finally, they examined horses and domestic pigeons, both of which are domesticated like dogs and which share characteristics like being subject to training.
The result was that dogs do well at discriminating complex visual patterns, like telling human faces apart, but so do chimps and pigeons. Dogs are good at smells, but they are bested by pigs, which can even distinguish between the odors of familiar and unfamiliar people. Dogs are not especially skilled at what Lea and Osthaus term physical cognitionrecognizing the consequences of manipulating objects like strings attached to food. Despite the heartwarming nature of movies like Homeward Bound, dogs arent particularly good at navigating over long distances.
But it doesnt make sense to pick on an animal, no matter how beloved, and rank it according to a scale that only works in a single dimension or on human-centric traits. For the most part, nonhuman animals are not considered smart unless theyve passed a test designed by humans, like making a tool or recognizing themselves in a mirror. But dogs are good at things that make sense for dogs, not things that make sense for humans. Though an unsatisfying answer, it makes sense from an evolutionary standpoint.
Early humans used medicine and treated injuries such as fractures, but where did their knowledge come from? Do animals help themselves feel better when they are sick?
Yes. Chimpanzees in Africa eat a variety of plants, but some individuals have been seen to select the young shoots of one particular plant, stripping the stems of their bark, and chewing the bitter pith and juice. These individuals often seemed sick with diarrhea, weight loss, and a lack of energy. Researchers found that the use of the plant was associated with a drop in intestinal parasites. Chimps will also swallow entire leaves from a different plant whole (without chewing) and here the leaves had tiny hairs that seem to scrape worms from the gut and allow them to be expelled.
This kind of behavior doesnt necessarily require a sophisticated level of cognition. Animals have many ways of changing their behavior to deal with infection, and not all of the animals that do so are those we consider smart, as we do apes. For instance, goats supposedly eat anything, from tin cans to laundry off the line, but they are remarkably sensitive foragers. If infected with roundworms, they will eat more of a shrub containing a chemical that fights the worms.
Many birds nests are plagued by lice, fleas, and other parasites. These suck blood from the young birds and can lead to slower growth or even death. The parent birds cant physically remove the pests, but some species place aromatic leaves inside the nest. The plants act as a natural fumigant, reducing the number of fleas and other external parasites. House finches have even adapted to urban environments by weaving fibers from cigarette butts into their nests, also for its fumigant effect. The butts contain nicotine, which is often used as an insecticide, and it keeps fleas and lice away. The use of tobacco, however, carries a cost: in nests with nicotine, both the nestlings and their parents showed signs of DNA damage.
Darwin thought that insanity in animals demonstrated how all living things are related, so he thought they did get mentally ill. On the other hand, some scientists think that animals can serve as models for us to understand mental illness, but dont get the disorders themselves. Yet others think animals are only mentally ill when they are mistreated by humans.
I agree with Darwin, and one of the best places to see the continuity of mental disorders in humans and animals is in Obsessive Compulsive Disorder, OCD. People have noticed for many years that some characteristics of OCD are also seen in animals, particularly dogs. The disorder means doing normal behaviorshand-washing, turning in circles before lying downtoo much. In dogs, we call it CCD, Canine Compulsive Disorder, because we cant know what dogs are or arent obsessing over.
A scientist named Elinor Karlsson and her team have identified genes that affect a dogs risk of showing the disorder. These genes govern the way nerve cells communicate. But knowing a dogs genetic makeup wont tell you definitively whether or not they will exhibit the disorder. Dogs, like humans, inherit one copy of any particular gene from their mother and one copy from their father, so both can be the same or they can have one normal and one abnormal gene. Of the dogs with two normal copies, 10% have CCD anyway; of the ones with one copy of each type, 25% have it; and of the dogs with two abnormal copies, 60% show CCD, but not all of them. Knowing the dogs genetic profile doesnt tell you for sure whether the dog has the disorder.
This shows us two things. First, entanglement of genes and the environment because the gene doesnt cause the disorder unless the environment favors it. Second, mental disorders can illustrate the common evolutionary roots in our brains and bodies that give rise to amazingly different behaviors.
To listen to the audio version read by author Marlene Zuk, download the Next Big Idea App today:
Read the original here:
Dancing Cockatoos and the Dead Man Test: How Behavior Evolves and Why it Matters - Next Big Idea Club Magazine
Every day nearly 3 million teachers report to work to teach the future of America. For many, this work is a calling and a privilege, but the conditions of their workplace are worsening and becoming more challenging. Why? Politics are hampering teachers abilities to help children succeed.
The wake of the COVID-19 pandemic has had a tremendous psychological impact on our children. The National Center for Education Statistics reports more than half of all schools reported increased data on fighting and threats between students. More than half of schools reported increased disruptions because of student misconduct. Verbal abuse and disrespect in classrooms from students is up. Nearly 80 percent of public schools need more support for mental health.
Students are experiencing previously unseen levels of anxiety, depression and behavioral health challenges, as well as gaps in their grasp of important concepts, facts and knowledge critical for future success. Teachers and school districts can help with this, if we can stop playing politics.
Young children need social-emotional competencies such as getting along with one another, working collaboratively to solve problems, and how to effectively deal with interpersonal conflict and failure. As a former teacher in public schools and former superintendent in Connecticut, I know these skills dont come naturallythey are learned. And they form the basis of social-emotional learning (SEL), critical and powerful skills that are essential to young peoples ability to succeed not just in school, but also in the workplace, at home and in their communities.
Students who lack these competencies cannot learn to their potential. While the focus on academic remediation from lost learning rightfully has been front and center, we know that this loss cannot be recovered while students are under emotional duress or in a mental health crisis. Just as in the 1960s when public schools began feeding breakfast to hungry students so they could learn more effectively, today we must ensure that our students are emotionally nourished to promote success.
Unfortunately, social emotional learning has become a tool that is being unnecessarily wielded by politicians. A 2017 study found that SEL helped pre-kindergarten students improve executive function, better regulate their emotions and hone social skills. Other studies have shown that learning these skills can help historically underserved populations.
The reason social-emotional competencies are questioned is because some individuals do not understand, or do not want to understand, what SEL means and how it is taught. Parents have every right to be concerned about what their children are learning. Likewise, teachers seeking to build student competencies understand that they cannot reach kids who are an emotional mess.
We cannot assume that children know how to recognize what their emotions are, let alone how to work with them safely and skillfully. Without direct SEL instruction, children may move through adolescence and into adulthood avoiding their emotions. This can result in maladaptive behaviors such as addiction, overworking, overeating, anger and isolation.
Lacking these healthy tools, children grow up unable to solve problems or interact effectively with peers. They may struggle to succeed at school, in the workplace and in their personal and professional relationships. Exploring these critical lessons in humanity and personal growth is especially important in this era where standardized testing, pandemic-driven isolation and pervasive achievement gaps have allowed schools and communities to lose sight of the whole child, sacrificing emotional and social growth for manufactured metrics.
It is incredibly naive and disingenuous to blame SEL for the disintegration of societal norms and behaviors. Its quite the opposite, actuallySEL is democracy in practice. Its not dogmatic and gives our children space and resources for learning about themselves and the world around them. This includes setting and achieving positive goals, feeling and showing empathy for others and establishing and maintaining positive relationships.
SEL is our North Star, the foundation upon which relationships and the ability to survive and flourish in society is based. It helps teach us how to relate to one another and to prosper as individuals, a society and a nation. Strong leadership comes from equally strong and emotionally healthy individuals well versed in human behavior, compassion and open minds. We must reject the overt politicization of SEL and do whats best for our kids. Our country is counting on it.
David Title, Ed.D., is Associate Clinical Professor, chair of Department of Educational and Literacy Leadership, and director of the Ed.D. program focused on Social, Emotional and Academic Learning in the Isabelle Farrington College of Education & Human Development at Sacred Heart University in Fairfield, Conn.
See the article here:
The kids arent alright: We must ensure that our students are emotionally nourished - The Hill
Researchers in Ranjana Mehtas lab capture functional brain activity as operators work with robots on a manufacturing task to track the operators trust or distrust levels.
Texas A&M Engineering
The future of work is here.
As industries begin to see humans working closely with robots, theres a need to ensure that the relationship is effective, smooth and beneficial to humans. Robot trustworthiness and humans willingness to trust robot behavior are vital to this working relationship. However, capturing human trust levels can be difficult due to subjectivity, a challenge researchers in the Wm Michael Barnes 64 Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at Texas A&M University aim to solve.
Ranjana Mehta, associate professor and director of the NeuroErgonomics Lab, said her labs human-autonomy trust research stemmed from a series of projects on human-robot interactions in safety-critical work domains funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF).
While our focus so far was to understand how operator states of fatigue and stress impact how humans interact with robots, trust became an important construct to study, Mehta said. We found that as humans get tired, they let their guards down and become more trusting of automation than they should. However, why that is the case becomes an important question to address.
Mehtaslatest NSF-funded work, recently published inHuman Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, focuses on understanding the brain-behavior relationships of why and how an operators trusting behaviors are influenced by both human and robot factors.
Mehta also has another publication in the journalApplied Ergonomicsthat investigates these human and robot factors.
Using functional near-infrared spectroscopy, Mehtas lab captured functional brain activity as operators collaborated with robots on a manufacturing task. They found faulty robot actions decreased the operators trust in the robots. That distrust was associated with increased activation of regions in the frontal, motor and visual cortices, indicating increasing workload and heightened situational awareness. Interestingly, the same distrusting behavior was associated with the decoupling of these brain regions working together, which otherwise were well connected when the robot behaved reliably. Mehta said this decoupling was greater at higher robot autonomy levels, indicating that neural signatures of trust are influenced by the dynamics of human-autonomy teaming.
What we found most interesting was that the neural signatures differed when we compared brain activation data across reliability conditions (manipulated using normal and faulty robot behavior) versus operators trust levels (collected via surveys) in the robot, Mehta said. This emphasized the importance of understanding and measuring brain-behavior relationships of trust in human-robot collaborations since perceptions of trust alone is not indicative of how operators trusting behaviors shape up.
Sarah Hopko 19, lead author on both papers and recent industrial engineering doctoral student, said neural responses and perceptions of trust are both symptoms of trusting and distrusting behaviors and relay distinct information on how trust builds, breaches and repairs with different robot behaviors. She emphasized the strengths of multimodal trust metrics neural activity, eye tracking, behavioral analysis, etc. can reveal new perspectives that subjective responses alone cannot offer.
The next step is to expand the research into a different work context, such as emergency response, and understand how trust in multi-human robot teams impact teamwork and taskwork in safety-critical environments. Mehta said the long-term goal is not to replace humans with autonomous robots but to support them by developing trust-aware autonomy agents.
This work is critical, and we are motivated to ensure that humans-in-the-loop robotics design, evaluation and integration into the workplace are supportive and empowering of human capabilities, Mehta said.
View original post here:
Tracking Trust In Human-Robot Work Interactions - Texas A&M Today - Texas A&M University Today
David Lieberman is a specialist in the field of human behavior and interpersonal relationships. He is a renowned psychotherapist and author of eleven books. He has trained personnel in the U.S. military, the FBI, the CIA, and the NSA, and his instructional video is mandatory for psychological operations graduates. He teaches government negotiators, mental health professionals, and Fortune 100 executives.
Below, David shares 5 key insights from his new book, Mindreader: The New Science of Deciphering What People Really Think, What They Really Want, and Who They Really Are. Listen to the audio versionread by David himselfin the Next Big Idea App.
Paying close attention to both what people say and how they say itlanguage pattern and sentence structurereveals whats actually going on inside their heads. There are seven or eight different markers to consider.
One such marker is pronoun usage. From a psycholinguistic standpoint, pronouns can reveal whether someone is trying to separate themself from their words. In much the same way that an unsophisticated liar might look away because they are feeling guilt and eye contact increases intimacy, a person making an untrue statement often subconsciously distances from their own words. The personal pronouns (e.g., I, me, mine, and my) indicate that a person is committed to and confident about their statement. Omitting personal pronouns may signal someones reluctance to accept ownership of their words.
Lets take the example of giving a compliment. A woman who believes what shes saying is more likely to use a personal pronoun. For instance, I really liked your presentation. However, a person offering insincere flattery might say, Nice presentation, or Looks like you did a lot of research. In the second case, she has removed herself from the equation. Those in law enforcement are well acquainted with this principle and recognize when people are filing a false report about their car being stolen because they typically refer to it as the car or that car and not my car or our car. Of course, you cant gauge honesty by a single sentence, and pronoun usage is only one of a dozen of different markers available to us.
Those in law enforcement know that victims of violent crimes, such as abduction or assault, rarely use the word we. Instead, theyll relate the events in a way that separates them from the aggressor, referring to the attacker as he or she and themselves as I. Rather than saying, We got into the car, they are inclined to phrase it as, He put me in the car. Recounting a story that is peppered with we, us, and our may indicate psychological closeness and implies an association, a relationship, and perhaps even cooperation.
We can observe benign applications of this in everyday life. At the end of a date, Jack and Jill walk out of a restaurant, and Jill inquires, Where did we park the car? An innocent question, but using we, instead of you, indicates that she has begun to identify with Jack and sees them as a couple. Asking Where is your car parked? hardly implies disinterest, but turning your into our does expose a subtext of interest.
Whenever I speak to couples, Im always on the lookout when the word we is conspicuously absent from conversation. Research finds that married couples who use cooperative language (e.g., we, our, and us), more often than individualized language (e.g., I, me, and you) have lower divorce rates and report greater marital satisfaction. Studies also demonstrate a powerful correlation between such pronoun use and how couples respond to disagreements and crises, predicting whether they will team up and cooperate or become polarized and divided. The use of you-words (e.g., you, your, and yourself) may suggest unexpressed frustration or outright aggression. A person who says, You need to figure this out, conveys enmity and a me-versus-you mindset. However, We need to figure this out, indicates us-versus-the-problem, a presumption of shared responsibility and cooperation.
Again, a single, casual reference does not mean anything (and any of these statements might signal anger or frustration in the moment, not about the marriage itself), but a consistent pattern of syntax reveals everything.
The implications of syntax extend to the corporate arena. Research finds that firms where workers typically refer to their workplace as the company or that company, rather than my company or our company, and to coworkers mostly as they rather than my coworkers, are likely to have low morale and a high rate of turnover. Similarly, in sports a fair-weather fan can be spotted through language: When the fans team wins, they characteristically declare, We won. But when the team loses, it becomes, They lost. The pronoun we is typically reserved for positive associations.
Sun Tzu, in The Art of War, neatly distills the bluff: If able, appear unable; if active, appear inactive; if near, appear far; if far, appear near.
When a person is bluffing, they are managing others impressions to convey the right effect and serve a personal agenda. Conversely, the authentic person is not interested in how they come across because they are unconcerned with their image. A deceptive counterpart focuses solely on others impressions and puts a great deal of effort into presenting a certain image. The latter person almost always goes too far.
A bluff occurs when someone is really against something but pretends to be for itor vice versa. The person is trying to create a false impression to disguise their true intentions. Therein lies the key: People who bluff habitually overcompensate, so you can uncover a bluff instantly by noticing how someone tries to appear. Lets take an example from the world of poker.
A card player bets heavily and raises the pot. Does he have the cards or simply guts? When a person is bluffing in a poker hand, he wants to show he is not timid. He might put his money in quickly. But if he does have a good hand, he may deliberate a bit, showing that he is not really sure about his hand. Poker professionals know that a bluffing person will give the impression of having a strong hand, while a person with a strong hand will imply that their hand is weak.
When people feign confidence they manipulate how self-assured they appear because we equate confidence with calm. For instance, law enforcement professionals know that a suspect may yawn as if to show he is relaxed or even bored. If the person is sitting, they may slouch or stretch, covering more territory as if to demonstrate a feeling of ease. Or the suspect may busily pick lint off his slacks, trying to show he is preoccupied with something trivial and is clearly not worried about the charges. The only problem (for the guilty person) is that a wrongly accused person will be indignant and wont try promoting the right image. Remember, people who bluff habitually overcompensate.
Imagine that a man woke up one morning insisting he was a zombie. His wife tried shaking him into reality, to no avail. She reached out to his mother, who also tried to snap him out of this delusion. Not knowing what else to do, they finally took him to a psychiatrist but the guy insisted to the doctor, as he had to both his wife and mother, that he does not have a problem. The psychiatrist said, But I hear that you think that youre a zombie. The man said, Doc I know Im a zombie. The psychiatrist asked if zombies bleed and the man said they dont. So, the psychiatrist pricked the mans finger and it bled. The man stared in amazement at his finger, blood trickling down, and looked up to say, Well what do you know, zombies do bleed.
The moral of the story is that people see themselves, others, and their world the way that they need to, in order to reconcile with their personal narrativeto make sense of themselves, their choices, and their lives.
The greater our ego, the more vulnerable we feel, and the greater our drive to predict and control our world. We then interpret the world to fit our narrative, rather than adjusting our worldview to fit reality. Essentially, we color the world so that we are untainted.
Take notice of how people see themselves and their worldwhat attracts their attention and what they avoid; what they condemn and what they defendto know their story of I. Or put differently, the what (they focus on and see) tells you the why (they focus on it), and the why tells you the who (they really are).
Building a psychological assessment begins with asking, Why do they need to see that which they are looking for in the first place?
Ralph Waldo Emerson wrote: People do not seem to realize that their opinion of the world is also a confession of character. This is a piercing insight into human nature. A person looks at the world as a reflection of themselves. If they see the world as corrupt, they feel on some level that they are corrupt. If they see honest working people, that is frequently how they see themselves. Thats why con artists are the first to accuse others of cheating.
The old saying, What Susie says about Sally says more of Susie than of Sally, has a strong psychological basis. Research finds that when you ask someone to rate the personality of another persona close colleague, an acquaintance, or a friendtheir response provides direct insight into their personality traits and emotional health. Indeed, findings show a huge suite of negative personality traits are associated with viewing others negatively. Specifically, the level of negativity the rater uses in describing the other person and the simple tendency to see people negatively indicates a greater likelihood of depression and various personality disorders, including narcissism and antisocial behavior. Similarly, seeing others in a positive light correlates with how happy, kindhearted, and emotionally stable a person is.
The less emotionally healthy a person is, the more they denigrate the world to accommodate their own insecurities. Hence, how someone treats you is a reflection of their own emotional health and says everything about them and nothing about you. We give love. We give respect. If someone doesnt love themselves, what do you expect them to give back? The emotionally healthy person is true to themselves, nonjudgmental, and accepting of others.
Knowledge is not power. Knowledge is a tool. How it is wielded makes all of the difference. Real power is the responsible application of knowledge. Knowing what people really think and feel saves time, money, energy, and heartache. But it also positions you to better understand, help, and heal those who are in pain. The techniques in my book are to be used responsibly, to enlighten, empower, and inspire. They are designed to educate so that you can become more effective in your life and interactions and more optimistic about your abilities and possibilities.
To listen to the audio version read by author David Lieberman, download the Next Big Idea App today:
Continue reading here:
Mindreader: The New Science of Deciphering What People Really Think, What They Really Want, and Who They Really Are - Next Big Idea Club Magazine
Written by Karen L. Bystrom
Ken Allan, PhD, Associate Professor, Art History, and Charles M. Tung, PhD, Professor, English, co-organized a seminar, Survival is Insufficient: Infrastructures of Preservation and Transmission, at the Association for the Study of the Arts of the Present (ASAP) Conference at UCLA, Sept 15-18, 2022. Allans paper, Radio/Aether: Wallace Bermans Verifax Collages and LIFE Magazine as a Medium for the Sixties, considered the artist's use of the magazine as an archive and the emergence of information theory during the postmodern turn in the arts. Tungs paper, Critical University Studies in Deep Time, focused on contemporary representations of educational institutions and scenes of learning against a backdrop of seed banks, survivalist libraries, and bunkers. Allan serves on the ASAP board as Secretary.
P. Sven Arvidson, PhD, Professor and Director of Interdisciplinary Liberal Studies, published "Reverent Awe and the Field of Consciousness" in the peer-reviewed philosophy journal Human Studies.
Dominic CodyKramers, MFA, Associate Teaching Professor, Performing Arts and Arts Leadership, is designing sound for Seattle Shakespeare Company's production of Shakespeare's Macbeth, featuring the acting and music talents of Dean Powers' son, Hersh. The play opens October 28 and runs thru November 20.
Serena Cosgrove, PhD, Associate Professor, International Studies, and her co-editors, Wendi Bellanger, PhD, and Irina Carlota Silber, PhD, are happy to share the news that their book,Higher Education, State Repression, and Neoliberal Reform in Nicaragua: Reflections from a University under Fire, has just been published by Routledge. This innovative volume makes a key contribution to debates around the role of the university as a space of resistance by highlighting the liberatory practices undertaken to oppose dual pressures of state repression and neoliberal reform at the Universidad Centroamericana (UCA) in Nicaragua. With a range of contributors from Nicaragua and Central Americanist scholars in the U.S., including the editors, one of the chapters was authored by Andrew Gorvetzian, who graduated in 2015 from Seattle University with a double major in International Studies and Spanish.
Elizabeth Dale, PhD, Associate Professor, Nonprofit Leadership, co-authored an article with Nicole Plastino, MNPL 20. Dale, E. J., & Plastino, N. J. (2022). Giving With Pride: Considering Participatory Grantmaking in an Anti-Racist, LGBTQ+ Community Foundation. The Foundation Review, 14(1).
Amelia Seraphia Derr, MSW, PhD, Associate Professor, Social Work, will present a paper at The Council on Social Work Education Annual Conference in Anaheim on November 12, Educating for Self and Community Care: Sustaining Students in their Social (Justice) Work.
Fade Eadah, PhD, Assistant Professor, Psychology, had an article, Teaching Agents to Understand Teamwork: Evaluating and Predicting Collective Intelligence as a Latent Variable via Hidden Markov Models, accepted for Computers in Human Behavior, a top multidisciplinary journal in Psychology. The article shows a new method for predicting future behavior in teamwork based on past behavior, which will allow for AI to (eventually) appropriately time interventions.
Gabriella Gutirrez y Muhs, PhD, Professor, Modern Languages and Women Gender, and Sexuality Studies, delivered the Hispanic and Latinx Heritage Month Keynote Address for the EKU Chautauqua Lecture Series at Eastern Kentucky University.
Janet Hayatshahi, MFA, Assistant Professor, Performing Arts and Arts Leadership, was interviewed by American Theatre for Zharia ONeal Is Sound Theatres First William S. Yellow Robe Playwright.
Jacqueline Helfgott, PhD, Professor, Criminal Justice and Director, Crime & Justice Research Center, was interviewed for Las Vegas Murders on Mass Shootings Anniversary is Coincidence, Experts Say.
Audrey Hudgins, EdD, Clinical Associate Professor, Matteo Ricci Institute, with Seattle University student, Cullin Egge, and a colleague and student from Universidad Iberoamericana Puebla, Guillermo Yrizar and Metztli Chavez, presented Collaborative Online International Learning (COIL): A Tool for Global Citizenship at the 2022 American Association of Colleges and Universities (AAC&U) Conference on Global Learning. She has been invited to write a chapter called "Global experiential learning: (De)Constructing Housing Justice in Tijuana, Mexico" to be included in the book, Critical Innovations in Global Development Studies Pedagogy.
Kira Mauseth, PhD, Senior Instructor, Psychology, appeared in Hundreds of thousands of kids with mental health needs aren't receiving necessary help, an interview that appeared nationally and on KOMO 4. Also, asco-lead of the Behavioral Health Strike Team for the Washington State Department of Health, talks about her work in with the Northwest Mental Health Technology Transfer Center in Training and Supporting Healthcare Leadership during the COVID Pandemic, published in the latest issue of Elevate, a publication of the Public Health Learning Network.
James Miles, MFA, Assistant Professor, Performing Arts and Arts Leadership, presented Its Bigger Than Hip Hop with Dr Jason Rawls from Ohio University, emcee/teacher Vinson Wordsworth Johnson, and emcee/teaching artist John Lil Sci Robinson at the Teach Better Conference in Akron, OH, October 14 and 15.
Quinton Morris, DMA, Associate Professor, Violin, will be honored as a recipient of the distinguished Pathfinder Award by the Puget Sound Association of Phi Beta Kappa. This award reflects the imagery on the distinguished Phi Beta Kappa key, a hand pointing to the stars and is given to those individuals who "encourage others to seek new worlds to discover, pathways to explore, and untouched destinations to reach. The people, businesses, and institutions honored do something to broaden peoples' interests in active intellectual accomplishments; they reach beyond ordinary routine, beyond the regular requirement of their lives and jobs, in order to break new intellectual ground and/or inspire others to do so. Morris is being honored for his scholarship and community work as an educator and youth advocate through his work with his nonprofit organization, Key to Change. Morris will receive the distinguished award on November 17.
Patrick Schoettmer, PhD, Associate Teaching Professor, Political Science, was interviewed for Senate candidates spar over coffee, crime in Seattle's Capitol Hill neighborhood, on KOMO 4.
Kirsten Moana Thompson, PhD, Professor and Director, Film Studies, and Theiline Pigott-McCone Endowed Chair (2022-24), delivered a keynote address The Doors of Perception: Scintillating Light and Stuttering, Starburst Animation at the Conference on Color, Bern Lichtspiel Kinemathek, Switzerland, September 25-28, 2022. She published" Introduction to Animation and Advertising", Malcolm Cook and Kirsten Moana Thompson, Handbook Animation Studies, (In German) eds. Franziska Bruckner, Julia Eckel, Maike Reinerth, and Erwin Feyersinger. Springer, (forthcoming) 2022. She also presented the conference paper, Indigeneity, Corporate and alt right Appropriations: Fantasies of the Pacific, from Moana to Aquaman, New Zealand Studies Association (NZSA), Marseille, France, July 5-8, 2022.
Charles M. Tung, PhD, Professor and Chair, English, published a chapter, Clocks: Modernist Heterochrony and the Contemporary Big Clock, in The Edinburgh Companion to Modernism and Technology, edited by Alex Goody and Ian Whittington. In this piece, Tung argues: When powered by modernist clockwork, the big clock of human civilization and the time of the planet the clock that seems to preside over scenes of an ultimate fate, an absolute break and temporal reset, and even over omega-point fantasies of the death of time itself ticks in a most peculiar way. The enlarged order of modernisms clocks reveals not only that time is elapsing differently in different reference frames, but also that the present and the experience afforded by it are shot through unevenly with a variety of temporal rates and scales.
Mariela Lpez Velarde, Assistant Professor, PhD, Spanish, Modern Languages and Cultures, was an invited speaker at the series of conferences entitled The future of internationalization in Jesuit Universities. It was a forum organized by AUSJAL (Asociacin de Universidades confiadas a la Compaa de Jess de Amrica Latina/ Association of Universities Entrusted to the Society of Jesus in Latin America) dedicated to the discussion and dialogue about the integration of the international dimension of the work done in Jesuit universities around the world.
Read more here:
News | About the College | College of Arts and Sciences - The Seattle U Newsroom - News, stories and more
Did you miss a session from MetaBeat 2022? Head over to the on-demand library for all of our featured sessions here.
Traditionally, cybersecurity has been all about technology but really, it is a people problem.
Research indicates that human behavior accounts for the majority of cybersecurity issues: 95% according to the World Economic Forum; 82% per Verizons 2022 Data Breach Investigations Report; nearly 91% according to the U.K.s Information Commissioners Office.
This is not for lack of training, said Flavius Plesu, CEO of new software-as-a-service (SaaS) platform OutThink.
Workers have not been ignored; training has always been a key part of the security landscape, he said.
Low-Code/No-Code Summit
Join todays leading executives at the Low-Code/No-Code Summit virtually on November 9. Register for your free pass today.
However, he pointed out, these have primarily been delivered through computer-based Security Awareness Training (SAT).
The focus of SAT has until now been to instruct, rather than to understand users, he said.
To address this, OutThink claims it has invented a new category of software: The cybersecurity human risk management platform. To aid in its development, the company today announced that it has raised $10 million in a seed-stage funding round, led by Albion VC, with participation from Triple Point Ventures, Forward Partners, Gapminder and Innovate U.K.
The entire platform is about making the human side of security practical, said Plesu.
Cyberattacks continue to increase in complexity, scope and cost. The average cost of a data breach globally is $4.35 million; in the U.S. its more than double that, at $9.44 million.
In fact, the World Economic Forums 2021 Global Risks Report ranks cyberattacks as one of the top three biggest threats of the decade, alongside weapons of mass destruction and climate change.
To the point of human behavior, the focus of this years Cybersecurity Awareness Month (October) is See Yourself in Cyber. Gartner identifies beyond awareness programs as one of the top trends in cybersecurity in 2022.
Progressive organizations are moving beyond outdated compliance-based awareness campaigns and investing in holistic behavior and culture change programs designed to provoke more secure ways of working, writes Peter Firstbrook, Gartner VP analyst.
Companies offering platforms to this end include KnowBe4, SoSafe, CybSafe, Cyber Risk Aware and CyberReady, among others.
OutThinks tool uses monitored machine learning (ML), natural language processing (NLP) and applied psychology to reveal what users truly believe and gauge their risk, explained Plesu.
Intelligence is combined with data from integrated security systems like Microsoft Defender or Microsoft Sentinel to present live dashboards showing the overall human risk picture at a department, group or organization level, as well as the root causes of that risk, he said.
Based on this information, the platform then recommends or automates the delivery of tailored improvement actions.
All three points of the people-processes-technology triangle are better aligned and joined up, said Plesu, and people are no longer the problem: They become the solution.
The platform is already used by a number of large global organizations including Whirlpool, Danske Bank, Rothschild and FTSE 100 brands, he said.
OutThink came from Plesus personal experience as a CISO. Early in his career, he explained, he led complex cybersecurity transformation programs within large global organizations.
It became clear to me that, despite considerable investment in technical security measures and awareness training, we were still exposed, he said.
He began to rethink cybersecurity and address the human risk challenge with CISO peers and members of the academic community.
Plesu noted that, whenever people use computer systems to process or handle information, there is an inherent risk that someone will make a mistake, or turn against the company and cause deliberate damage. Cybersecurity human risk management aims to answer three key questions for CISOs:
The idea for OutThink was born out of frustration with the first-generation solutions in the market, but it also came from a passionate belief: If we engage people beyond security awareness training, we can make them an organizations strongest defense mechanism, said Plesu.
One FTSE 100 organization benchmarked OutThink using independent phishing simulation platforms (Proofpoint and Cyber Risk Aware). After just one individualized security awareness OutThink session, its employees were 47.74% less likely to click on a phishing link and 46% more likely to correctly identify and report a phishing email, said Plesu.
By contrast, he said, first-generation tools on the market provide e-learning modules or videos and phishing simulations that are typically identical to all users.
While these have moderate levels of efficacy, they suffer from the same problem as any training solution: The vast majority of information (75%) is forgotten within a week, he pointed out.
Newer platforms use ML to understand behaviors and target training, namely through surveys. But NLP and data science are typically not applied to understand how people feel and think about security; they are dependent on honest responses.
A huge number of cognitive biases mean this is a risky approach, said Plesu. People tend to overestimate their own ability and knowledge, especially for those with the weakest competencies.
Also, people tend to think of themselves as exceptions, and they will provide the responses requiring the least effort.
There are also custom-designed e-learning assets for organizations or specific departments within them, he said.
We do not consider this to be a viable alternative because there are major differences in the security attitudes including personality, risk perception and intentions and behaviors of each employee within an organization; even within the same department, said Plesu.
Ultimately, the continual growth of cybercrime shows that conventional approaches arent working, he said. There is an urgent need for effective new approaches to cybersecurity human risk management.
VentureBeat's mission is to be a digital town square for technical decision-makers to gain knowledge about transformative enterprise technology and transact. Discover our Briefings.
Go here to see the original:
OutThinks cybersecurity training uses NLP and data to mitigate employee-related risks - VentureBeat
LOS ANGELES
NINJIO, a cybersecurity awareness company thatleadsthe industry in customer satisfaction, has acquiredDCOYA an advanced behavior-centric cybersecurity solutions provider. The combination of NINJIOs engaging cybersecurity content with DCOYAs powerful machine-learning-driven cybersecurity awareness platform will give CISOs and other company leaders the most effective cybersecurity awareness training toolkit on the market.
Like NINJIO, DCOYA focuses on behavior modification an approach thats only becoming more crucial as cybercriminals continue to rely on social engineering to infiltrate companies and steal sensitive information. DCOYAs technology works backward from the psychological tactics of the most successful human-related hacks. The new solution will allow NINJIO to determine a persons area of greatest vulnerability (greed, fear, obedience, and others) and provide reinforcing education that specifically addresses that vulnerability. Additionally, the acquisition of DCOYA will allow NINJIO to track and report how individuals, subgroups, and whole companies improve over time, allowing CISOs and CIOs to see the results of their behavior change tactics, beyond simulated phishing failure and reporting. These resources empower NINJIO to provide a comprehensive cybersecurity awareness solution to its customers that is unlike anything currently available.
DCOYA is a perfect fit for NINJIO because the team is aligned with our core philosophy, says NINJIO CEO Shaun McAlmont. We already offer the best behavior-based learning content on the market, as well as an integrated LMS, simulated phishing tests, and reporting. We are thrilled to add a set of digital tools that will make our platform even more proactive, automated, and data-driven. DCOYAs machine-learning-powered technology enables us to meet a security professionals specific needs and streamline their approach to cybersecurity.
DCOYAs emphasis on behavioral neuroscience stems from the basic human motivations hackers use to exploit individuals. Verizons 2022 Data Breach InvestigationsReportfound that 82 percent of breaches involved a human element, which highlights the importance of having a strong security awareness program. A vital component of any cybersecurity awareness program is the ability to determine whether its actually leading to sustainable behavior change among employees. NINJIO will leverage DCOYAs sophisticated technology to give security leaders a clearer picture of what employees are learning, where reinforcement is necessary, and how companies can continue to establish a culture of cybersecurity awareness. Customers will also have access to benchmarking so they can see how theyre performing relative to their peers.
It was clear to us that connecting to NINJIO meets our vision to lead cybersecurity awareness into a safer place for all users. In fact, it was one of the easiest decisions we have made, said Asaf Kostel, CEO of DCOYA. He continued: The combined capabilities and solutions of both companies will revolutionize the cybersecurity awareness landscape. As we see it, changing behavior based on science and AI is an important and significant step toward a safer world in terms of cyber awareness and reflects a complete fit for the shared vision.
By giving customers results-based, customizable, and prescriptive training, in-depth analytics on employee behavior and progress, and the ability to automate their platforms, DCOYAs machine learning technology will drastically expand NINJIOs suite of cybersecurity solutions. This will allow CISOs and other company leaders to increase stakeholder support and create sustainable cultural change at their organizations.
###
NINJIOis a cybersecurity awareness company that empowers individuals and organizations to become defenders against cyberthreats. The company creates 3 to 4-minute Hollywood-style micro-learning videos that teach organizations, employees, and families how not to get hacked.
DCOYAis a leading and trusted provider of behavior-centric cybersecurity solutions for organizations of all sizes. We understand how to encourage and train employees so they can reduce both the risk and cost of social engineering attacks. Our unique platform actively and automatically engages employees in security awareness training, educates them on adopting the proper security habits, and decreases the risk of a successful attack.
Gauge Capital is a leading middle-market private equity firm based in Southlake, Texas. Gauge invests in five key sectors: business services, consumer, government & industrial services, healthcare and technology. The firm manages more than $2.0 billion in capital and in 2020 and 2021, Inc. Magazine named Gauge one of the top private equity firms for founders. In 2021 and 2022, Gauge was also named to the Top 50 PE Firms in the Middle Market by Grady Campbell. In 2022, Gauge ranked in the top 5 out of 517 private equity firms in the HEC Paris-Dow Jones Small-Cap Buyout Performance Ranking. For more information, please contact Andrew Peix, Managing Director of Business Development at [emailprotected]
Follow this link:
NINJIO Expands Services With Strategic Acquisition Of Innovative Behavior-based Cybersecurity Company DCOYA - CIO Dive