The credibility of dietary advice formulated by ChatGPT: Robo-diets for people with food allergies.

The introduction of ChatGPT has sparked enormous public interest in large language (deep-learning) models, which have been sophisticated enough to perform well on a variety of tasks. One way people are using these models is to construct diets. The prompts often include food restrictions that are an obligatory part of everyday life for millions of people worldwide. The aim of this study was to investigate the safety and accuracy of 56 diets, constructed for hypothetical individuals who are allergic to food allergens. Four levels, corresponding to the "baseline" ability of ChatGPT without prompting for specifics, as well as its ability to prepare appropriate diets when an individual has an adverse food reaction to two allergens or solicits a low-calorie diet, were defined. Findings from our study demonstrated that ChatGPT, although generally accurate, has the potential to produce harmful diets. More common errors involve inaccuracies in portions or calories of food, meals, or diets. We discuss here how the accuracy of large language models could be increased and the trade-offs involved. We propose that prompting for elimination diets can serve as one way to assess differences between such models.

Photographic data on the influence of the composition, preparation method, time and fuel system on the size of water droplets in a fuel-water emulsion.

The article presents the data collected during the research aimed at understanding the influence of the composition, mixing time and time between the production and application of the fuel-water emulsion, as well as the influence of the fuel pump of the miniature gas turbine GTM-120 on the droplet size of the fuel-water emulsion. Emulsions with a water content of 3 to 15% and an emulsifier content of 1 to 3% were tested. The basic fuel in the conducted tests was Jet-A1 with the addition of 5% oil. The data presented include microscopic photos of emulsions in fifteen combinations of the amount of water and emulsifier, photos of emulsions pumped by a fuel pump operating at loads corresponding to the engine running from idle to full power. The data also include photos of the emulsions during their production, the time of mixing the water with the remaining ingredients, and photos of the emulsions the day after their preparation.

Treatment choice in the presence of conflicting information: The role of physician likeability in the choice of non-proven therapies against conventional treatment.

Research on why patients sometimes choose non-proven therapies (NPT) instead of conventional treatments is limited. We investigated how physician likeability influences the choice of NPT instead of conventional treatment. In an experiment with three medical scenarios, participants (N = 384) consulted two physicians who gave conflicting recommendations: The first physician recommended a conventional treatment and the second one recommended a NPT. We manipulated the likeability of the first physician, who was either likeable or unlikeable. Using mediation analyses, we explored how the effect of likeability was channelled and whether time pressure influenced treatment choice. Participants chose the NPT more often (OR = 1.43, 95% CI [1.03-2.00]), had more positive affective responses, and perceived more benefit from NPT when the conventional treatment was recommended by an unlikeable (vs. likeable) physician. Time pressure had no effect on treatment choice. Physicians' likeability might play an important role in treatment choice in the presence of conflicting information. Providers should be cognizant that poor communication might push patients to prefer the advice of more likeable physicians, even when they prescribe NPT instead of conventional treatment.

The effect of gender and parenting daughters on judgments of morally controversial companies.

Earlier findings suggest that men with daughters make judgments and decisions somewhat in line with those made by women. In this paper, we attempt to extend those findings, by testing how gender and parenting daughters affect judgments of the appropriateness of investing in and working for morally controversial companies ("sin stocks"). To do so, in Study 1 (N = 634) we investigate whether women judge the prospect of investing in sin stocks more harshly than men do, and test the hypothesis that men with daughters judge such investments less favorably than other men. In Study 2 (N = 782), we investigate the willingness to work in morally controversial companies at a significant wage premium. Results show that-for men-parenting daughters yields harsher evaluations of sin stocks, but no evidence that it lowers the propensity to work in such companies. This contrasts to the effect of gender: women reliably judge both investment and employment in morally controversial companies more harshly than men do. We suggest that an aversion towards morally controversial companies might be a partial determinant of the gender gap in wages.

Thinking in a foreign language distorts allocation of cognitive effort: Evidence from reasoning.

Bilinguals, in their foreign language, are spared from several decision-making biases. We examined this "Foreign Language Effect" in the context of logical reasoning, in which reasoners are required to track the logical status of a syllogism, ignoring its believability. Across three experiments, we found the reverse Foreign Language Effect; foreign language reasoners are less able to evaluate the logical structure of syllogisms, but no less biased by their believability. One path to succeeding in reasoning tasks is always engaging in reflective processing. A more efficient strategy is metacognitively tracking whether belief-based intuitions conflict with logic-based intuitions and only reflecting when such conflict is present. We provide evidence that foreign language reasoners are less accurate because they struggle to detect belief-logic conflict, and in turn fail to engage in reflective processing when necessary to override the incorrect, intuitive response. We propose that foreign language reasoners are less able to detect belief-logic conflict either due to weakened intuitions or due to a more conservative threshold for the detection of conflict between multiple competing intuitions. Data for the experiments can be accessed publicly at https://osf.io/phbuq/.

Robo-investment aversion.

In five experiments (N = 3,828), we investigate whether people prefer investment decisions to be made by human investment managers rather than by algorithms ("robos"). In all of the studies we investigate morally controversial companies, as it is plausible that a preference for humans as investment managers becomes exacerbated in areas where machines are less competent, such as morality. In Study 1, participants rated the permissibility of an algorithm to autonomously exclude morally controversial stocks from investment portfolios as lower than if a human fund manager did the same; this finding was not different if participants were informed that such exclusions might be financially disadvantageous for them. In Study 2, we show that this robo-investment aversion manifests itself both when considering investment in controversial and non-controversial industries. In Study 3, our findings show that robo-investment aversion is also present when algorithms are given the autonomy to increase investment in controversial stocks. In Studies 4 and 5, we investigate choices between actual humans and an algorithm. In Study 4 -which was incentivized-participants show no robo-investment aversion, but are significantly less likely to choose machines as investment managers for controversial stocks. In contrast, in Study 5 robo-investment aversion is present, but it is not different across controversial and non-controversial stocks. Overall, our findings show a considerable mean effect size for robo-investment aversion (d = -0.39 [-0.45, -0.32]). This suggests that algorithm aversion extends to the financial realm, supporting the existence of a barrier for the adoption of innovative financial technologies (FinTech).

The dissolution of temporal distance increases risk-taking: experimental evidence.

Earlier research shows that delaying the realization of a lottery (temporal distance) increases risk tolerance. Presumably, this happens because temporal distance protects one from encountering the negative emotions produced when facing risk. However, no study has tested whether people that made a choice in the presence of temporal distance would actually change their decision later on (in the absence of temporal distance), towards the safer choice. To test this, 137 participants were subject to actual temporal distance, consisting of a four-week waiting period. To explore how each participant behaved "in the heat of the moment" (in the absence of temporal distance), we assessed their electrodermal activity and analysed self-description measures of susceptibility to affect. Participants had to choose between 40 lottery pairs (they could win up to the equivalent of about $400 US; the expected payout for each participant was about $12). Results showed that, contrary to expectations, participants tended to choose riskier lotteries after the waiting period. The results of an additional experiment suggest that this is not the result of prior exposure to the same set of lotteries, however, interestingly, an exploratory analysis showed that the main effect was driven by the behaviour of male participants. We discuss possible explanations for our surprising main finding and its implications for studies on temporal distance.

Reading dilemmas in a foreign language reduces both deontological and utilitarian response tendencies.

Moral dilemmas entail deciding whether to cause harm to maximize overall outcomes, such as killing 1 person to save 5. Past work has demonstrated that people are more willing to accept causing such outcome-maximizing harm when they read dilemmas in a foreign language they speak rather than their native language. Presumably this effect is due to foreign dilemmas inducing reduced emotional impact, rather than increased cognitive processing, but previous work cannot distinguish between these possibilities because it treats them as diametric opposites. In the current work, we applied process dissociation to independently estimate harm-rejection and outcome-maximization response tendencies underlying dilemma responses. These findings reveal that reading dilemmas in a foreign language reduces both harm-rejection and outcome-maximization inclinations. This pattern clarifies past work by suggesting that reading dilemmas in a foreign language reduces concern for all potential victims-both the fewer to be harmed and the majority to be saved. (PsycINFO Database Record