Prediction of Drivers' Subjective Evaluation of Vehicle Reaction Under Aerodynamic Excitations.

OBJECTIVE: The objectives are to determine which quantities are important to measure to determine how drivers perceive vehicle stability, and to develop a regression model to predict which induced external disturbances drivers are able to feel. BACKGROUND: Driver experience of a vehicle's dynamic performance is important to auto manufacturers. Test engineers and test drivers perform several on-road assessments to evaluate the vehicle's dynamic performance before sign-off for production. The presence of external disturbances such as aerodynamic forces and moments play a significant role in the overall vehicle assessment. As a result, it is important to understand the relation between the subjective experience of the drivers and these external disturbances acting on the vehicle. METHOD: A sequence of external yaw and roll moment disturbances of varying amplitudes and frequencies is added to a straight-line high-speed stability simulation test in a driving simulator. The tests are performed with both common and professional test drivers, and their evaluations to these external disturbances are recorded. The sampled data from these tests are used to generate the needed regression model. RESULTS: A model is derived for predicting which disturbances drivers can feel. It quantifies difference in sensitivity between driver types and between yaw and roll disturbances. CONCLUSION: The model shows a relationship between steering input and driver sensitivity to external disturbances in a straight-line drive. Drivers are more sensitive to yaw disturbance than roll disturbance and increased steering input lowers sensitivity. APPLICATION: Identify the threshold above which unexpected disturbances such as aerodynamic excitations can potentially create unstable vehicle behaviour.

How positive and negative intergroup contact jointly inform minority support for social change: The role of system-fairness beliefs.

Research suggests that positive contact with majorities may 'sedate' (undermine) minority support for social change, while negative contact may promote it. However, most studies to date have examined both forms of contact separately, which may not give an accurate picture of their effects. This study examines the joint effects and interplay of positive and negative contact on minority support for social change, and the role of system-fairness beliefs across seven ethnic minority samples in six countries (N = 790). Multigroup Structural Equation Modelling showed that negative contact predicted higher minority support for social change. Positive contact predicted both less support for social change indirectly via enhanced system-fairness beliefs, and more support for social change directly. Except for one national context, the total effects of positive contact were either non-significant or significantly positive. This shows that increased system-fairness beliefs can explain sedative effects of positive contact, and that positive contact may also promote support for social change. We conclude that sedative effects of positive contact may be overestimated by not considering negative contact.

Support for Social Change Among Members of Advantaged Groups: The Role of a Dual Identity Representation and Accepting Intergroup Contact.

This preregistered research analyzed survey data from ethnic and religious advantaged groups in 12 countries (N = 2,304) to examine the interplay between two determinants of support for social change toward intergroup equality. Drawing on the needs-based model and the common-ingroup identity model, we hypothesized that the experience of accepting intergroup contact and the endorsement of a dual identity representation of intergroup relations would be associated with greater support for equality. Furthermore, integrating the logic of both models, we tested the novel hypothesis that the positive effect of accepting contact on support for equality would be stronger under a high (vs. low) dual identity representation. While the predicted main effects received empirical support, we found no evidence for the expected interaction. These findings suggest that interventions to foster support for social change among advantaged group members can promote accepting contact and a dual identity representation independently of each other.

Need satisfaction in intergroup contact: A multinational study of pathways toward social change.

What role does intergroup contact play in promoting support for social change toward greater social equality? Drawing on the needs-based model of reconciliation, we theorized that when inequality between groups is perceived as illegitimate, disadvantaged group members will experience a need for empowerment and advantaged group members a need for acceptance. When intergroup contact satisfies each group's needs, it should result in more mutual support for social change. Using four sets of survey data collected through the Zurich Intergroup Project in 23 countries, we tested several preregistered predictions, derived from the above reasoning, across a large variety of operationalizations. Two studies of disadvantaged groups (Ns = 689 ethnic minority members in Study 1 and 3,382 sexual/gender minorities in Study 2) support the hypothesis that, after accounting for the effects of intergroup contact and perceived illegitimacy, satisfying the need for empowerment (but not acceptance) during contact is positively related to support for social change. Two studies with advantaged groups (Ns = 2,937 ethnic majority members in Study 3 and 4,203 cis-heterosexual individuals in Study 4) showed that, after accounting for illegitimacy and intergroup contact, satisfying the need for acceptance (but also empowerment) is positively related to support for social change. Overall, findings suggest that intergroup contact is compatible with efforts to promote social change when group-specific needs are met. Thus, to encourage support for social change among both disadvantaged and advantaged group members, it is essential that, besides promoting mutual acceptance, intergroup contact interventions also give voice to and empower members of disadvantaged groups. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Can conditionals explain explanations? A modus ponens model of B because A.

We suggest a normative model for the evaluation of explanations B because A based on probabilistic conditional reasoning and compare it with empirical data. According to the modus ponens model of explanations, the probability of B because A should equal the joint probability of the conditional if A then B and the explanans A. We argue that B because A expresses the conjunction of A and B as well as positive relevance of A for B. In Study 1, participants (N = 80) judged the subjective probabilities of 20 sets of statements with a focus on belief-based reasoning under uncertainty. In Study 2, participants (N = 376) were assigned to one of six item sets for which we varied the inferential relevance of A for B to explore boundary conditions of our model. We assessed the performance of our model across a range of analyses and report results on the Equation, a fundamental model in research on probabilistic reasoning concerning the evaluation of conditionals. In both studies, results indicate that participants' belief in statements B because A followed model predictions systematically. However, a sizeable proportion of sets of beliefs contained at least one incoherence, indicating deviations from the norms of rationality suggested by our model. In addition, results of Study 2 lend support to the idea that inferential relevance may be relevant for the evaluation of both conditionals and explanations.

Author Correction: A large-scale test of the link between intergroup contact and support for social change.

An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via a link at the top of the paper.

A large-scale test of the link between intergroup contact and support for social change.

Guided by the early findings of social scientists, practitioners have long advocated for greater contact between groups to reduce prejudice and increase social cohesion. Recent work, however, suggests that intergroup contact can undermine support for social change towards greater equality, especially among disadvantaged group members. Using a large and heterogeneous dataset (12,997 individuals from 69 countries), we demonstrate that intergroup contact and support for social change towards greater equality are positively associated among members of advantaged groups (ethnic majorities and cis-heterosexuals) but negatively associated among disadvantaged groups (ethnic minorities and sexual and gender minorities). Specification-curve analysis revealed important variation in the size-and at times, direction-of correlations, depending on how contact and support for social change were measured. This allowed us to identify one type of support for change-willingness to work in solidarity- that is positively associated with intergroup contact among both advantaged and disadvantaged group members.