Low Prospects and High Risk: Structural Determinants of Health Associated with Sexual Risk Among Young African American Women Residing in Resource-Poor Communities in the South

African American women at increased risk of HIV/sexually transmitted infection (STI) may engage in risky sex as a coping mechanism for depressed economic conditions. This study examines the association between high-risk sexual behavior and structural determinants of sexual health among a sample of young African American women. 237 young African American women (16–19 years old) from economically disadvantaged neighborhoods in North Carolina were enrolled into a randomized trial testing the efficacy of an adapted HIV/STI prevention intervention. Logistic regression analyses predicted the likelihood that young women reporting lack of food at home, homelessness and low future prospects would also report sexual risk behaviors. Young women reporting a lack of food at home (22 %), homelessness (27 %), and low perceived education/employment prospects (19 %) had between 2.2 and 4.7 times the odds as those not reporting these risk factors of reporting multiple sex partners, risky sex partners including older men and partners involved in gangs, substance use prior to sex, and exchange sex. Self-reported structural determinants of sexual health were associated with myriad sexual risk behaviors. Diminished economic conditions among these young women may lead to sexual risk due to hopelessness, the need for survival or other factors.     

A cross-sectional and longitudinal analysis of reward-related brain activation: Effects of age,pubertal stage,and reward sensitivity

Neurobiological models suggest that adolescents are driven by an overactive ventral striatum (VS) response to rewards that may lead to an adolescent increase in risk-taking behavior. However, empirical studies showed mixed findings of adolescents’ brain response to rewards. In this study, we aimed to elucidate the relationship between reward-related brain activation and risky decision-making. In addition, we examined effects of age, puberty, and individuals’ reward sensitivity. We collected two datasets: Experiment 1 reports cross-sectional brain data from 75 participants (ages 10–25) who played a risky decision task. Experiment 2 presents a longitudinal extension in which a subset of these adolescents (n = 33) was measured again 2 years later. Results showed that (1) a reward-related network including VS and medial PFC was consistently activated over time, (2) the propensity to choose the risky option was related to increased reward-related activation in VS and medial PFC, and (3) longitudinal comparisons indicated that self-reported reward sensitivity was specifically related to VS activation over time. Together, these results advance our insights in the brain circuitry underlying reward processing across adolescence.     

Crossing road intersections in old age—With or without risks? Perceptions of risk and crossing behaviours among the elderly

Pedestrians aged over 65 are known to be a critical group in terms of road safety because they represent the age group with the highest number of fatalities or injured persons in road accidents. It is widely recognized that the latter is due to the physical vulnerability of this age group in case of injury. However, physical and cognitive decline come into play during the action of crossing a street. Various studies have attempted to connect the crossing behaviours of the elderly with variables such as age, gender, sensory acuity, level of attentiveness, physical decline and the design of intersections. In demonstrating the complexity of the relationship between people and their environments, the literature suggests that age, physical ability, and the spatial configuration of roads are major components of road safety. Moreover, people’s knowledge and mastery of their environments, as well as their ability to adapt to change affects how they move through space. Taking these factors into account, this study examines the perceptions of elderly pedestrians with regards to the quality and risks of road crossings in the context of Montréal, Québec, in Canada. The analyze are based on observations and questionnaires in order to bring to light a better understanding of the relationship between the crossing behaviours, characteristics and perceptions of the elderly. While previous studies have examined perception and observation separately, this study is unique in having looked at both angles simultaneously. Five profiles of elderly people in both urban and suburban environments were established. A sample of 181 elderly pedestrians (65–93 years of age, AVG = 74) were surveyed using a questionnaire. In addition to close-ended questions, respondents were asked to evaluate 17 environmental ambiance and risk behaviours according to various scales. Using principal component analysis (PCA) and hierarchical cluster analysis (HCA), the data was grouped into 6 categories that define and distinguish 7 profiles of elderly people. These profiles were explored according to the socioeconomic status and crossing behaviours of respondents. The probabilities of adopting different crossing behaviours were tested by employing logistic regression models. The results reveal greater variability in the perceptions of the elderly in terms of risk related to crossing behaviours and type of signalisation at intersections. Even among seniors, the perceptions of risk varied greatly, which may have had an impact on their behaviours. While some of the behaviours observed coincided with the perceptions of respondents, the results of this study suggest that they only play a marginal role.     

Loss Aversion,Intellectual Inertia,and a Call for a More Contrarian Science: A Reply to Simonson & Kivetz and Higgins & Liberman

Higgins and Liberman (2018) and Simonson and Kivetz (2018) offer scholarly and stimulating perspectives on loss aversion and the implications for the sociology of science of its acceptance as a virtual law of nature. In our view, Higgins and Liberman (2018) largely complement our conclusion that the empirical evidence does not support loss aversion. Moreover, in alignment with our call for a contextualized perspective, they provide an excellent discourse on how a more nuanced view of reference points and consumers’ regulatory focus enriches our understanding of the psychological impact of losses and gains. Simonson and Kivetz (2018) approached our perspective with skepticism, and, while they retain some skepticism, they express agreement on the larger point that loss aversion has been accepted too uncritically. Both commentaries point to a need for a critical reevaluation of prevailing paradigms. Here, we build on these perspectives, as well as our experience working on the topic of loss aversion, to call for structural changes to facilitate scholarly debate on science's status quo.     

Salience Versus Proportional Reasoning: Rethinking the Mechanism Behind Graphical Display Effects

Two experiments examined predictions from two separate explanations for previously observed display effects for communicating low‐probability risks: foreground:background salience and proportional reasoning. According to foreground:background salience, people's risk perceptions are based on the relative salience of the foreground (number of people harmed) versus the background (number of people at risk), such that calling attention to the background makes the risk seem smaller. Conversely, the proportional reasoning explanation states that what matters is whether the respondent attends to the proportion, which conveys how small the risk is. In Experiment 1, we made the background more salient via color and bolding; in contrast to the foreground:background salience prediction, this manipulation did not influence participants' risk aversion. In Experiment 2, we separately manipulated whether the foreground and the background were displayed graphically or numerically. In keeping with the proportional reasoning hypothesis, there was an interaction whereby participants given formats that displayed the foreground and background in the same modality (graphs or numbers, thereby making the proportion easier to form) saw the probability as smaller and were less risk averse than participants given the information in different modalities. There was also a main effect of displaying the background graphically, providing some support for foreground:background salience. In total, this work suggests that the proportional reasoning account provides a good explanation of many display effects related to communicating low‐probability risks, although there is some role for foreground:background salience as well. Copyright © 2018 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Are Decisions Made by Group Representatives More Risk Averse? The Effect of Sense of Responsibility

We tested the hypothesis that a sense of responsibility drives group representatives' decisions to be more risk averse compared with decisions made by individuals. The hypothesis was supported when the monetary considerations (i.e., payoff inequality and the magnitude effect) were controlled for in the potential gain domain as well as in the potential loss domain. Evidence showed that this is because the group representatives were concerned about how they would view themselves (e.g., guilt and self‐blame) and also how they would be viewed by others (i.e., to avoid being blamed and looked down upon by others). This study provided new insights into understanding group representatives' decision making under risk. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.