Search

Welcome! This repository is meant to collate documents that may be helpful to researchers thinking of conducting large-scale, multi-country replication studies (MCRs) in psychology. This project originated in two in-depth panel discussions with researchers from around the world involved in MCRs, conducted by the Junior Researcher Programme. These panels also resulted in a journal article (https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.57538) and a checklist based on the insights gained from the discussions. We want to foster a collaborative environment, so please feel free to request access to this project if you'd like to add any relevant documents or links. In the files section you will find: -A checklist based for aspects you may want to consider before conducting a multi-country replication -A brief reading list on MCRs -Examples of successful large-scale MCRs in psychology

This is accompanying material and data related to workshops that aimed to gain patient input into the development of an ePI app with the IMI Pharmaledger project. The data included is not pre-registered, but simply made a permanent, unchangeable record in line with Open Research Europe's publishing guidelines.

This repository contains supplementary files to our paper describing the background and use of the EU PEARL Patient and Community Engagement Platform: https://patientengagement.synapseconnect.org/initiatives/eu-pearl-patient-and-community-engagement-in-platform-trials

Presentation Slides, Posters, and Resources from the jSchool 2021 Open Conference. Updated as we receive more information!

This project aims to validate the Multi-dimensional Psychological Well-being scale in Lebanon, for Syrian and Palestinian refugees as well as for the Lebanese host community. It will then use this scale to explore correlates of psychological well-being in disadvantaged populations. This project is funded by R4HC-MENA, developing research capacity for health in conflict and is conducted by the Centre for Business Research at the University of Cambridge.

Despite numerous advances in their content and structure over recent years, paper information leaflets for medicines are often hard to read for people with visual impairments, contain a lot of technical information, and people suffering from chronic conditions may find it challenging to identify all side-effects or dangers of taking a drug in their situation. Likewise, for people already taking different drugs, identifying contraindications may be time-intensive and easily overlooked, posing a risk for affected patients. Electronic product information (ePI), or eLeaflets, provide an opportunity for improvements in how patients interact with the information provided. We summarise opportunities of ePI and experiences from a co-creation process of such an app together with patients as part of the Pharmaledger project and put it into context of the current policy environment in the EU in light of EMA’s key principles for the adoption of ePI in medicine. While more patient-friendly information remains a significant ask, ePI has the potential to make leaflets easier and quicker to read through search and zoom functions, provide a safe digital medicine cabinet employing blockchain technology, enables patients to identify falsified product boxes, receive real-time updates when a product expires or is being recalled by the manufacturer, and potentially even include a reminder function to increase adherence. We present a potential research agenda across disciplines for interested researchers. While many welcome the benefits of ePI, we urge policymakers to keep in mind that some groups, specifically people with low technical literacy, should not be left without alternatives. We recommend early initiatives to ensure a widespread understanding of how ePI works across populations while also taking this opportunity to use new insights to improve leaflets on paper.

Questions of societal import have both normative (what should be done) and descriptive (what is the case) dimensions. In this chapter, we address disagreements about the latter through the lens of political cognition, a research effort spanning cognitive psychology and experimental political science. We consider various explanations for fierce disagreements about "facts on the ground" and find that first, extensive evidence shows that judgments sort by political partisanship. Second, individual differences in threat sensitivity and uncertainty tolerance predict partisan group membership, which aids understanding of group differences but not necessarily differences in descriptive beliefs. Third, no evidence suggests a historically unusual deficit in scientific understanding. Fourth, some evidence implicates well-studied features of thought (confirmation bias, motivated reasoning), but these features appear to be symmetrical across the partisan divide. Finally, emergent evidence implicates people's assessments of information sources, processes that are also susceptible to motivated reasoning and partisan cueing and moreover are challenged by a media environment that is historically unusual. We conclude that the most promising conceptualizations of disagreement over empirical matters will acknowledge that partisan cues are often valid cues indicating the beliefs of people's groups and address difficulties of information source assessment in our current, unstable information environment.

Where people live, what they eat, how careful they are about taking their medications, and even what they do in their spare time are very much related to the quality of their lives and their health-related outcomes. While our genetic makeup accounts for a significant portion of our health outcomes, we know that health is also heavily influenced by what are known as social determinants: education, wealth, neighborhood safety, housing, and health literacy, among many others. Throughout the day, we face many decisions that have a direct or indirect impact on our health and quality of life. Many of these choices can be influenced toward healthier options by behavioral interventions. This chapter presents behavioral insights and interventions that have a high potential to impact the health of community members, reduce disparities, and improve their overall quality of life. These insights and interventions range from increased medical adherence to improved nutritional choices using nudges, regulations, provision of information, or rewards for positive behaviors.

Evidence from the behavioural sciences is increasingly used to inform and improve policy around the world across many domains. These behavioural insights can be used for a number of purposes, such as improving communication to the public, encouraging healthier behaviour, and increasing the uptake of social services that improve life outcomes. However, not all evidence can be equally applied to any policy; the strength of the evidence and suitability for the situation at hand should be assessed case by case and ideally more evidence within the new context should be established. This report presents an approach to incorporating behavioural insights into policy using a number of examples while leveraging original work on mental health, trust, and decision-making in Lebanon. The aim is not to present a specific recipe or set of recommendations, but to share general concepts and examples for consideration in establishing a behavioural policy framework.

European Union (EU) member states are bound to ensure accessible, good quality healthcare for all of their citizens. In 2018, Bosnia and Herzegovina has been named as a candidate for accession to EU membership as part of the “Strategy for the Western Balkans”. This scoping review identifies healthcare access issues in the country, aiming to inform policy-makers of challenges that may be faced in a possible membership application process and beyond. While the country has seemingly improved citizens’ healthcare access—as measured by the Healthcare Access and Quality Index—various specific problems remain unresolved. The main barrier to equal access appears to lie in the division of the healthcare system between the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Republika Srpska, and the Brcko District, which also influences medicine availability and pricing. Although not necessarily systematic, studies further report distance from healthcare providers, alleged widespread corruption, discrimination of minorities and vulnerable populations, as well as vaccination gaps as problems in healthcare access for specific groups. While certainly not easy to realise, this scoping review concludes that possible solutions could include efforts to unify the healthcare and pricing system, and the implementation of the World Health Organization’s Essential Medicines List, as well as investigating and tackling corruption and stigma issues., South Eastern European Journal of Public Health (SEEJPH), Volume XI, 2019

Economic inequality is associated with preferences for smaller, immediate gains over larger, delayed ones. Such temporal discounting may feed into rising global inequality, yet it is unclear whether it is a function of choice preferences or norms, or rather the absence of sufficient resources for immediate needs. It is also not clear whether these reflect true differences in choice patterns between income groups. We tested temporal discounting and five intertemporal choice anomalies using local currencies and value standards in 61 countries (N = 13,629). Across a diverse sample, we found consistent, robust rates of choice anomalies. Lower-income groups were not significantly different, but economic inequality and broader financial circumstances were clearly correlated with population choice patterns. Ruggeri et al. find in a study of 61 countries that temporal discounting patterns are globally generalizable. Worse financial environments, greater inequality and high inflation are associated with extreme or inconsistent long-term decisions.

The use of Open Science practices is often proposed as a way to improve research practice, especially in psychology. Open Science can increase transparency and therefore reduce questionable research practices, making research more accessible to students, scholars, policy makers, and the public. However, little is known about how widespread Open Science practices are taught and how students are educated about these practices. In addition, it remains unknown how informing students about Open Science actually impacts their understanding and adoption of such practices. This registered report proposes the validation of a questionnaire. The aim is to survey how much psychology students know about Open Science and to assess whether knowledge of and exposure to Open Science in general—be it through university curricula or social media—influences attitudes towards the concept and intentions to implement relevant practices.

Lebanon is rapidly adapting public services to meet local needs as well as those of refugees from conflict regions such as Syria. However, these challenges are complicated by high volumes of individuals with poor mental health, who are also at risk of poor decision-making and may avoid the use of health services due to low trust in government institutions, among other reasons. Over 700 individuals residing in Lebanon, including Lebanese nationals, Syrian refugees and Palestinians from Lebanon, completed a series of measures covering decision-making with risk, mental health, and trust. The aim was to determine if significant relationships existed between these three and if those patterns were consistent between the three populations. A widely used well-being questionnaire produced similar unidimensional factor structures as found in other settings, indicating suitability for use in Lebanon, including refugees. Higher subjective well-being was associated with more risk-taking among refugees (β = 0.07, SE = 0.02, z = 4.63, p β = −0.003, SE = 0.01, z = −0.32, p = 0.75). However, average subjective well-being did not significantly differ between the Lebanese host population and refugees (absolute difference = −1.27, 95% CI = [−2.83, 0.29], on a 60-point scale), or between Syrian and Palestinian refugees (absolute difference = −1.53, 95% CI = [−4.16, 1.08]). Behavioural interventions (nudges and boosts) designed to support people in making choices more advantageous for them showed moderate effects. There is a clear pattern of greater risk-taking for refugees with better subjective well-being. This is an important finding as greater risk-taking can be associated with a number of negative health outcomes, particularly in vulnerable populations. While the behavioural interventions do show some effect on improving advantageous choice, these risk patterns are of clear interest to policymakers dealing with the health and well-being of all residents in Lebanon.