Revisiting incidence rates comparison under right censorship.

Data description is the first step for understanding the nature of the problem at hand. Usually, it is a simple task that does not require any particular assumption. However, the interpretation of the used descriptive measures can be a source of confusion and misunderstanding. The incidence rate is the quotient between the number of observed events and the sum of time that the studied population was at risk of having this event (person-time). Despite this apparently simple definition, its interpretation is not free of complexity. In this piece of research, we revisit the incidence rate estimator under right-censorship. We analyze the effect that the censoring time distribution can have on the observed results, and its relevance in the comparison of two or more incidence rates. We propose a solution for limiting the impact that the data collection process can have on the results of the hypothesis testing. We explore the finite-sample behavior of the considered estimators from Monte Carlo simulations. Two examples based on synthetic data illustrate the considered problem. The R code and data used are provided as Supplementary Material.

Prosocial motives underlie scientific censorship by scientists: A perspective and research agenda.

Science is among humanity's greatest achievements, yet scientific censorship is rarely studied empirically. We explore the social, psychological, and institutional causes and consequences of scientific censorship (defined as actions aimed at obstructing particular scientific ideas from reaching an audience for reasons other than low scientific quality). Popular narratives suggest that scientific censorship is driven by authoritarian officials with dark motives, such as dogmatism and intolerance. Our analysis suggests that scientific censorship is often driven by scientists, who are primarily motivated by self-protection, benevolence toward peer scholars, and prosocial concerns for the well-being of human social groups. This perspective helps explain both recent findings on scientific censorship and recent changes to scientific institutions, such as the use of harm-based criteria to evaluate research. We discuss unknowns surrounding the consequences of censorship and provide recommendations for improving transparency and accountability in scientific decision-making to enable the exploration of these unknowns. The benefits of censorship may sometimes outweigh costs. However, until costs and benefits are examined empirically, scholars on opposing sides of ongoing debates are left to quarrel based on competing values, assumptions, and intuitions.

Perceived offensiveness to the self, not that to others, is a robust positive predictor of support of censoring sexual, alcoholic, and violent media content.

Introduction: Harm and offense are two important notions in legal discussions on the extent to which one's freedom may be limited. Prior research on the third-person effect found that perceived media harm on others, not perceived media harm on the self, is a robust positive predictor of support of censoring socially undesirable media content (e.g., pornography). In comparison, how offensiveness perceptions predict censorship support is not clear. Drawing on moral foundations theory, we test here how perceived media offensiveness to the self compared with 1) perceived media offensiveness to others and 2) perceived media harm on others would predict censorship support. Method: We conducted two cross-sectional survey studies in the U.S. to address this question with sexual, alcoholic, and violent media content as test cases. In Study 1 (N = 544 undergraduates), we measured perceived media offensiveness to the self, that to others, and censorship support. In Study 2 (N = 727 non-student adults), we also measured perceived media harm on the self and others. Results: As in prior research, we found that people perceive sexual, alcoholic, and violent media content to harm other viewers more strongly than it harms themselves, and the perception of how much others are harmed predicts perceivers' censorship support. In contrast, while people also perceive the three types of media content to offend other viewers more strongly than they offend the self, the perception of how much others are offended predicts censorship support to a significantly lesser extent or does not predict this at all. Instead, the perception of how much the self is offended does. Discussion: These findings add to the work on moral foundations theory that distinguishes between how the care/harm and sanctity/degradation foundations relate to moral judgments. These findings also suggest that the current theorizing of the third-person effect needs to expand to reconcile the seemingly inconsistent results on how harm and offensiveness perceptions differently relate to censorship support. The care/harm and sanctity/degradation foundations may underlie how harm and offensiveness perceptions predict censorship support. However, several "anomalous" findings need to be accounted for before moral foundations provide a comprehensive explanation of the third-person effect.

Preventing online disinformation propagation: Cost-effective dynamic budget allocation of refutation, media censorship, and social bot detection.

Disinformation refers to false rumors deliberately fabricated for certain political or economic conspiracies. So far, how to prevent online disinformation propagation is still a severe challenge. Refutation, media censorship, and social bot detection are three popular approaches to stopping disinformation, which aim to clarify facts, intercept the spread of existing disinformation, and quarantine the source of disinformation, respectively. In this paper, we study the collaboration of the above three countermeasures in defending disinformation. Specifically, considering an online social network, we study the most cost-effective dynamic budget allocation (DBA) strategy for the three methods to minimize the proportion of disinformation-supportive accounts on the network with the lowest expenditure. For convenience, we refer to the search for the optimal DBA strategy as the DBA problem. Our contributions are as follows. First, we propose a disinformation propagation model to characterize the effects of different DBA strategies on curbing disinformation. On this basis, we establish a trade-off model for DBA strategies and reduce the DBA problem to an optimal control model. Second, we derive an optimality system for the optimal control model and develop a heuristic numerical algorithm called the DBA algorithm to solve the optimality system. With the DBA algorithm, we can find possible optimal DBA strategies. Third, through numerical experiments, we estimate key model parameters, examine the obtained DBA strategy, and verify the effectiveness of the DBA algorithm. Results show that the DBA algorithm is effective.

Racism and censorship in the editorial and peer review process.

Psychology aims to capture the diversity of our human experience, yet racial inequity ensures only specific experiences are studied, peer-reviewed, and eventually published. Despite recent publications on racial bias in research topics, study samples, academic teams, and publication trends, bias in the peer review process remains largely unexamined. Drawing on compelling case study examples from APA and other leading international journals, this article proposes key mechanisms underlying racial bias and censorship in the editorial and peer review process, including bias in reviewer selection, devaluing racialized expertise, censorship of critical perspectives, minimal consideration of harm to racialized people, and the publication of unscientific and racist studies. The field of psychology needs more diverse researchers, perspectives, and topics to reach its full potential and meet the mental health needs of communities of colour. Several recommendations are called for to ensure the APA can centre racial equity throughout the editorial and review process.

The Polarizing Impact of Political Disinformation and Hate Speech: A Cross-country Configural Narrative.

Information and communication technologies hold immense potential to enhance our lives and societal well-being. However, digital spaces have also emerged as a fertile ground for fake news campaigns and hate speech, aggravating polarization and posing a threat to societal harmony. Despite the fact that this dark side is acknowledged in the literature, the complexity of polarization as a phenomenon coupled with the socio-technical nature of fake news necessitates a novel approach to unravel its intricacies. In light of this sophistication, the current study employs complexity theory and a configurational approach to investigate the impact of diverse disinformation campaigns and hate speech in polarizing societies across 177 countries through a cross-country investigation. The results demonstrate the definitive role of disinformation and hate speech in polarizing societies. The findings also offer a balanced perspective on internet censorship and social media monitoring as necessary evils to combat the disinformation menace and control polarization, but suggest that such efforts may lend support to a milieu of hate speech that fuels polarization. Implications for theory and practice are discussed.

Development of beliefs about censorship.

Across four studies (total N = 431), we examined 5- to 10-year-old children's choices to censor depictions of harm. In all studies, children learned about (fictional) movies that depicted harmful behaviors and decided whether specific audiences should be allowed to watch those movies. In Study 1, children often censored depictions of harms and did so similarly when considering both themselves and another hypothetical child as the viewer. At the same time, children did not censor indiscriminately: Children censored depictions of intentional harms more than accidental harms and, in Study 2, children (and adults; N = 101) censored harms (especially intentional ones) more from younger versus older audiences. In Studies 3 and 4, we more directly tested children's motivations for censoring harms, examining dual potential motivations of 1) preventing viewers from feeling sad; and 2) preventing viewers from being inspired to engage in harmful behaviors. We found that children who were motivated to avoid inspiring harmful behaviors were especially likely to censor depictions of harmful intentions. Together, our results indicate that children make sophisticated decisions regarding censorship and underscore an early emerging motivation to disrupt cascades of harmful behavior. These findings hold implications for children's thinking about the psychological and behavioral consequences of harm and for children's thinking about the potential effects of media on themselves and others.

The book history of Rona M. Fields's A Society on the Run (1973): A case study in the alleged suppression of psychological research on Northern Ireland.

The US psychologist Rona M. Field's book A Society on the Run (1973) offered a psychological account of the nature and effects of the Northern Irish Troubles at their peak in the early 1970s. The book was withdrawn shortly after publication by its publisher, Penguin Books Limited, and never reissued. Fields alleged publicly that the book had been suppressed by the British state, a claim that has often been treated uncritically. Local Northern Irish psychologists suggested that the book was taken off the market because of its scientific deficiencies. Rigorous book-historical investigation using Penguin editorial fields reveals, however, that what might appear to be a case of state suppression, or an instance of disciplinary boundary work, can be explained instead by the commercial interests and professional standards of a publisher keen to preserve its reputation for quality and reliability.

Threats to Academic Freedom in Higher Education.

Much debate centers on the conditions of free speech and academic freedom within higher education. Underlying these debates are what appears to be increasing occurrences of ideologically based censorship battles within academia. This paper examines one aspect of those battles-e.g., how cancel culture has intruded into the academic environment of higher education. In particular, this paper explores how an ideologically based retraction practice may be infringing on academic freedom. The paper also discusses how an overly politicized academia may itself undermine the necessary conditions for academic freedom.

A Millian Case for Censoring Vaccine Misinformation.

The spread of vaccine misinformation may contribute to vaccine refusal/hesitancy and consequent harms. Nonetheless, censorship is often rejected on the grounds of free expression. This article examines John Stuart Mill's influential defence of free expression but finds that his arguments for freedom apply only to normal, reasonably favourable circumstances. In other cases, it may be permissible to restrict freedom, including freedom of speech. Thus, while Mill would ordinarily defend the right to express false views, such as that vaccines cause autism, he might have accepted restrictions on anti-vaccine misinformation during the present pandemic. This illustrates that even the staunchest defenders of free speech can permit temporary restrictions in exceptional circumstances.

The Historical Significance of Titicut Follies in Psychiatric Treatment: An Anti-Censorship Perspective.

Works of art and information judged as obscene can be censored or banned. This brief review evaluates the costs and benefits of censorship and the banning of artwork and information. In the history of psychology, Frederick Wiseman's film Titicut Follies epitomizes the disadvantages of concealing art content. Despite protecting the privacy of patients, the ban of Titicut Follies delayed the reform of psychiatric treatment practices and hospitals. The decision to censor or ban artistic and scientific information can result in the loss of knowledge and potential improvements to social, political, and economic institution practices.

'Chinese academia wouldn't be tolerant of my research': gay academics' concerns about conducting queer research in China.

Drawing on interviews with 40 Chinese gay academics, this paper reveals participants' concerns about conducting queer research in China. These include sexual-identity exposure, difficulty in publishing research and receiving funding, as well as marginalisation within university departments. Informed by Irvine's conceptualisation of sexuality research as dirty work, this research examines the operation of heteronormativity in the constitution of queer research as dirty work. It shows that heteronormativity is intrinsic to research censorship by authorities, as repressive politics pursue regime maintenance and regulate difference. It is argued that Chinese academia is a heteronormative space in which queer research is constrained by the institutions and the Party-state. By teasing out the nuances in participants' experiences of research censorship, this paper highlights the complexity of power at play, which is far from a one-way relationship of authorities exerting power over researchers. Institutions exert power over queer researchers and simultaneously submit to the higher-level power of the Chinese Communist Party political system; at the same time, queer researchers who are governed by heteronormativity and political control can express their agency and resist the censorship.

Theorising the Queer Optique through Curtis Harrington's Night Tide (1961).

This analysis has two interlinked goals. First, drawing on Lee Edelman, Dudley Andrew and Laura Mulvey, it theorizes the male homosexual optique, a mode of address that is predicated on the relationship between a film, its context of reception and its spectator, and which undermines the heterosexual exigencies of classical narrative style to implicitly address a gay male viewer. Second, it illustrates how the putatively heterosexual romance of Curtis Harrington's Night Tide (1961) appeals to gay male spectators through two mechanisms that underpin the optique, specifically the homosexual gaze and characterization. Key to each of these aims is how the non-normative heterosexual male body functions as a site of gay male objectification and identification. This article ultimately argues that Harrington's film enables us to envisage a queer cinema that is not predicated on fictions of homosexual desire but nevertheless provides a framework for deepening our understanding of what queer spectatorship (and the male homosexual gaze in particular) may involve.

Subjective Freedom of Speech: Why Do Citizens Think They Cannot Speak Freely?

We provide the first systematic research into the origins of subjective freedom of speech in Germany. Relying on the GLES 2021 Cross-Section Pre-Election Survey, which includes a newly designed survey item on subjective freedom of speech, we evaluate a whole range of plausible candidate hypotheses. First, we contribute to cumulative research by testing the explanatory factors in Gibson (1993)-citizens' social class, their political involvement and political preferences, and their personality dispositions-for the German case. Second, we move beyond the state of the art and test three new hypotheses that reflect more recent political developments and arguments in the free speech debate: the role of social media, increasing political and social polarization, and the rise of populism. Importantly, all hypothesis tests reported in this paper have been preregistered prior to data collection. Our results reveal that three explanatory factors are significantly, consistently, and substantively related to subjective free speech in Germany: political preferences, populist attitudes, and identification with the Alternative for Germany party. Supplementary Information: The online version of this article (10.1007/s11615-022-00414-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Censoring Intersex Science: A Medical School Scandal.

A senior pediatric endocrinologist at a leading medical school in Canada has for years provided the introductory lecture on Disorders of Sex Development/Intersexuality (DSD/I) in the standard second-year course. In 2020/2021, two students complained to medical school administrators about six specific issues of intersex theory and care that were addressed in the lecture (Polychronakos, 2021). Subsequently, the administration replaced the professor with a different lecturer, thus effectively censoring the dissemination of intersex science. An overview of the status of the clinical literature on intersexuality shows that the students' critiques focus on concepts and facts that have been developed in extensive medical and sexological research over the past 50-60 years, as is shown for each of their points of critique. By censoring the professor's teaching, the medical school not only violated academic freedom, but also suppressed well-established scientific facts, kept medical students uninformed about the diverse points of view in this area of clinical management, and likely undermined future evidence-based medical and psychosocial care by these students for individuals with this type of medical condition.

Raised in the world of psychoanalysis: an interview with Judith Dupont.

This interview with Dr. Judith Dupont contains her reminiscences and thoughts about two topics of importance for the historiography of psychoanalysis. First, Dr. Dupont recalls her growing up among and meeting with pioneers, such as Vilma Kovács, Alice and Michael Balint, Melanie Klein, Imre Hermann and others. Second, Dr. Dupont reconstructs the chronicle of Ferenczi's manuscripts: how they were entrusted to Michael Balint by Ferenczi's widow, the complex reasons Balint could not publish them for more than 30 years, and finally, how Dr. Dupont succeeded in bringing the Clinical Diary to the public, and thus enriched contemporary psychoanalysis with the presence of Ferenczi after more than 50 years of silence and censorship.

The pharmaceutical industry is dangerous to health. Further proof with COVID-19.

Background: The COVID-19 period highlights a huge problem that has been developing for decades, the control of science by industry. In the 1950s, the tobacco industry set the example, which the pharmaceutical industry followed. Since then, the latter has been regularly condemned for illegal marketing, misrepresentation of experimental results, dissimulation of information about the dangers of drugs, and considered as criminal. Therefore, this study was conducted to show that knowledge is powerfully manipulated by harmful corporations, whose goals are: 1/financial; 2/to suppress our ability to make choices to acquire global control of public health. Methods: Pharmaceutical industry techniques for manipulating science and COVID-19 reporting were reviewed. Several sources of official documents were used: PubMed; National Institutes of Health resources; pharmaceutical companies; policy documents; national newspapers and news agencies; and books by prominent professionals (scientific and legal). A few studies have not been published in peer-reviewed journals; however, they have been conducted by reputable scientists in their respective fields. Results: Since the beginning of COVID-19, we can list the following methods of information manipulation which have been used: falsified clinical trials and inaccessible data; fake or conflict-of-interest studies; concealment of vaccines' short-term side effects and total lack of knowledge of the long-term effects of COVID-19 vaccination; doubtful composition of vaccines; inadequate testing methods; governments and international organizations under conflicts of interest; bribed physicians; the denigration of renowned scientists; the banning of all alternative effective treatments; unscientific and liberticidal social methods; government use of behavior modification and social engineering techniques to impose confinements, masks, and vaccine acceptance; scientific censorship by the media. Conclusion: By supporting and selecting only the one side of science information while suppressing alternative viewpoints, and with obvious conflicts of interest revealed by this study, governments and the media constantly disinform the public. Consequently, the unscientifically validated vaccination laws, originating from industry-controlled medical science, led to the adoption of social measures for the supposed protection of the public but which became serious threats to the health and freedoms of the population.

Censorship and Suppression of Covid-19 Heterodoxy: Tactics and Counter-Tactics.

The emergence of COVID-19 has led to numerous controversies over COVID-related knowledge and policy. To counter the perceived threat from doctors and scientists who challenge the official position of governmental and intergovernmental health authorities, some supporters of this orthodoxy have moved to censor those who promote dissenting views. The aim of the present study is to explore the experiences and responses of highly accomplished doctors and research scientists from different countries who have been targets of suppression and/or censorship following their publications and statements in relation to COVID-19 that challenge official views. Our findings point to the central role played by media organizations, and especially by information technology companies, in attempting to stifle debate over COVID-19 policy and measures. In the effort to silence alternative voices, widespread use was made not only of censorship, but of tactics of suppression that damaged the reputations and careers of dissenting doctors and scientists, regardless of their academic or medical status and regardless of their stature prior to expressing a contrary position. In place of open and fair discussion, censorship and suppression of scientific dissent has deleterious and far-reaching implications for medicine, science, and public health.

Censorship as enabling: importing, distributing, and translating foreign films in the Arab Middle East.

Control over film exhibition in commercial film theatres globally has been perceived as a practice that an exclusive authority has enforced for so long. This study which casts light on the control enforced on foreign film exhibition in commercial cinemas in the Arab Middle East (AME), uncovers a system of foreign film exhibition in the AME that has been ever obscure to the public audience, readership, and researchers in fields like film studies and the broadcast of audiovisual content. The analysis of this system is based upon interviews with key agents involved in decision making regarding the foreign films selected for exhibition and the censorial practices implemented to make these selected films culturally suitable for commercial cinemas in the AME. These interviewees include an exhibitor in a regional film import and distribution company, film classifiers, and film translators. Their input helps to analyse the processes of foreign film selection, scene filtering, distribution, and classification that are all incorporated in the system of foreign film exhibition. Furthermore, this analysis helps to uncover an obscure system of exhibition and identify the policymaking process and the policymakers involved in this context. Thus, while this study argues that this system enables film exhibition, it challenges the prevailing perception that control over foreign film exhibition in the AME is exclusively enforced by an authority generally known as the board of censors.