RESUMEN
Watching movies is among the most popular entertainment and cultural activities. How do viewers react when a movie sequel increases racial minority actors in the main cast ("minority increase")? On the one hand, such sequels may receive better evaluations if viewers appreciate racially inclusive casting for its novel elements (the value-in-diversity perspective) and moral appeal (the fairness perspective on diversity). On the other hand, discrimination research suggests that if viewers harbor biases against racial minorities, sequels with minority increase may receive worse evaluations. To examine these competing possibilities, we analyze a unique panel dataset of movie series released from 1998 to 2021 and conduct text analysis of 312,457 reviews of these movies. Consistent with discrimination research, we find that movies with minority increase receive lower ratings and more toxic reviews. Importantly, these effects weaken after the advent of the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement, especially when the movement's intensity is high. These results are reliable across various robustness checks (e.g., propensity score matching, random implementation test). We conceptually replicate the bias mitigation effect of BLM in a preregistered experiment: Heightening the salience of BLM increases White individuals' acceptance of racial minority increase in a movie sequel. This research demonstrates the power of social movements in fostering diversity, equality, and inclusion.
Asunto(s)
Películas Cinematográficas , Racismo , Humanos , Racismo/psicología , Minorías Étnicas y Raciales , Negro o Afroamericano/psicología , Diversidad Cultural , Grupos Minoritarios/psicologíaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: The accuracy of artificial intelligence (AI) in medicine and in pathology in particular has made major progress but little is known on how much these algorithms will influence pathologists' decisions in practice. The objective of this paper is to determine the reliance of pathologists on AI and to investigate whether providing information on AI impacts this reliance. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The experiment using an online survey design. Under 3 conditions, 116 pathologists and pathology students were tasked with assessing the Gleason grade for a series of 12 prostate biopsies: (1) without AI recommendations, (2) with AI recommendations, and (3) with AI recommendations accompanied by information about the algorithm itself, specifically algorithm accuracy rate and algorithm decision-making process. RESULTS: Participant responses were significantly more accurate with the AI decision aids than without (92% vs 87%, odds ratio 13.30, P < .01). Unexpectedly, the provision of information on the algorithm made no significant difference compared to AI without information. The reliance on AI correlated with general beliefs on AI's usefulness but not with particular assessments of the AI tool offered. Decisions were made faster when AI was provided. DISCUSSION: These results suggest that pathologists are willing to rely on AI regardless of accuracy or explanations. Generalization beyond the specific tasks and explanations provided will require further studies. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that the factors that influence the reliance on AI differ in practice from beliefs expressed by clinicians in surveys. Implementation of AI in prospective settings should take individual behaviors into account.
Asunto(s)
Inteligencia Artificial , Patólogos , Algoritmos , Humanos , Masculino , Estudios ProspectivosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Physical inactivity is a global issue that affects people's health and productivity. With the advancement of mobile technologies, many apps have been developed to facilitate health self-management. However, few studies have examined the effectiveness of these mobile health (mHealth) apps in motivating exercise adherence. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to demonstrate the enhanced action design research (ADR) process and improve the design of mHealth apps for exercise self-management. Specifically, we investigate whether sending motivational messages improves adherence to exercise plans, whether the motivational effect is affected by personality, the impact of message type and repetition, and the process of involving a field experiment in the design process and learning new design principles from the results. METHODS: This formative research was conducted by proposing an enhanced ADR process. We incorporated a field experiment into the process to iteratively refine and evaluate the design until it converges into a final mHealth app. We used the Apple ResearchKit to develop the mHealth app and promoted it via trainers at their gyms. We targeted users who used the app for at least two months. Participants were randomly assigned to 1 of the 12 groups in a 2×3×2 factorial design and remained blinded to the assigned intervention. The groups were defined based on personality type (thinking or feeling), message type (emotional, logical, or none), and repetition (none or once). Participants with different personality types received tailored and repeated messages. Finally, we used the self-reported completion rate to measure participants' adherence level to exercise plans. By analyzing users' usage patterns, we could verify, correct, and enhance the mHealth app design principles. RESULTS: In total, 160 users downloaded the app, and 89 active participants remained during the 2-month period. The results suggest a significant main effect of personality type and repetition and a significant interaction effect between personality type and repetition. The adherence rate of people with feeling personality types was 18.15% higher than that of people with thinking types. Emotional messages were more effective than logical messages in motivating exercise adherence. Although people received repeated messages, they were more likely to adhere to exercise plans. With repeated reminders, the adherence rates of people with thinking personality types were significantly improved by 27.34% (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: This study contributes to the literature on mHealth apps. By incorporating a field experiment into the ADR process, we demonstrate the benefit of combining design science and field experiments. This study also contributes to the research on mHealth apps. The principles learned from this study can be applied to improve the effectiveness of mHealth apps. The app design can be considered a foundation for the development of more advanced apps for specific diseases, such as diabetes and asthma, in future research.
Asunto(s)
Aplicaciones Móviles , Automanejo , Telemedicina , Ejercicio Físico , Humanos , MotivaciónRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether the use of diabetes registries meeting Meaningful Use core objectives in primary care practices is associated with differences in quality of care and hospital utilization rates. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A practice assessment survey was conducted to identify whether and how practices were using diabetes registries. Insurance claims data from 2010 were used to compare the health outcomes of patients from practices that used diabetes registries meeting Meaningful Use-related objectives to the outcomes of patients from other practices. Logistic hierarchical linear modeling was used to analyze the data. RESULTS: Records from 12,514 diabetic patients (including 10,809 with type 2 diabetes) from 50 urban practices were included in the analysis. The results suggest that patients with type 2 diabetes who were treated in practices using registries for patient reminders were more likely to have completed the recommended laboratory testing (odds ratio [OR] 1.26, p < 0.01) and dilated retinal examinations (OR 1.14, p < 0.01). Patients in practices using registries for quality improvement were less likely to have 'avoidable hospitalization' (OR 0.83, p < 0.01) and emergency room visits (OR 0.76, p < 0.01). The use of a diabetes registry did not have a significant impact on the quality of care or hospital utilization for patients with type 1 diabetes. CONCLUSION: Use of diabetes registries meeting Meaningful Use core objectives is associated with higher completion or recommended lab tests and a lower hospital utilization rate for patients with type 2 diabetes.