Safety–critical events in everyday cycling – Interviews with bicyclists and video annotation of safety–critical events in a naturalistic cycling study

Research in cycling safety seeks to better understand bicycle-related crashes and injuries. The present naturalistic cycling study contributes to this research by collecting data about bicyclists’ behavior and impressions of safety–critical situations, information unavailable in traditional data sources (e.g., accident databases, observational studies). Naturalistic data were collected from 16 bicyclists (8 female; M = 39.1 years, SD = 11.4 years) who rode instrumented bicycles for two weeks. Bicyclists were instructed to report all episodes in which they felt uncomfortable while riding (subjective risk perception), even if they didn’t fall. After data collection, the bicyclists were interviewed in detail regarding their self-reported safety–critical events. Environmental conditions were also recorded via video (e.g., road surface, weather). In total, 63 safety–critical events (56 non-crashes, 7 crashes) were reported by the bicyclists, mainly due to interactions with other road users – but also due to poorly maintained infrastructure. In low-visibility conditions, vehicle-bicycle and bicycle-bicycle events were the most uncomfortable for the bicyclists. Self-reported pedestrian–bicycle events primarily consisted of pedestrians starting to cross the bicycle path without looking. With one exception, all crashes found in the study belonged to poorly maintained road and infrastructure. In particular, construction work or obstacles in the bicycle path were reported as uncomfortable and annoying by the bicyclists. This study shows how naturalistic data and bicyclists’ interviews together can provide a more informative picture of safety–critical situations experienced by the bicyclist than traditional data sources can.     

Diagnostic Classification Models for a Mixture of Ordered and Non-ordered Response Options in Rating Scales

When developing ordinal rating scales, we may include potentially unordered response options such as “Neither Agree nor Disagree,” “Neutral,” “Don’t Know,” “No Opinion,” or “Hard to Say.” To handle responses to a mixture of ordered and unordered options, Huggins-Manley et al. (2018) proposed a class of semi-ordered models under the unidimensional item response theory framework. This study extends the concept of semi-ordered models into the area of diagnostic classification models. Specifically, we propose a flexible framework of semi-ordered DCMs that accommodates most earlier DCMs and allows for analyzing the relationship between those potentially unordered responses and the measured traits. Results from an operational study and two simulation studies show that the proposed framework can incorporate both ordered and non-ordered responses into the estimation of the latent traits and thus provide useful information about both the items and the respondents.     

数据权属与规制探讨

数据可分为原生数据与衍生数据。原生数据视来源不同分属国家、集体或个人。数据处理而形成的衍生数据往往涉及多方利益,形成“利益光谱”,对应多方权利主体。基于价值优先次序、权利位阶规则等,数据利益的“两头强化,多方平衡”,是我国法律数据确权和规制的指导思想。“两头强化”是指法律强化对位于“利益光谱”两端的国家利益与个人权益的保护,“多方平衡”指的是多方主体数据权益的平衡。数据规制的“硬法”进路为：明确法律概念,分析“利益光谱”,确定利益归属,权衡优先次序,平衡多方利益,搭建规制框架,制定具体规则。

     

免除伦理审查制度适法性与可操作性探讨

结合我国现行法律和基本伦理原则,深入分析了免除伦理审查的前置条件和适用情形在适法性与可操作性上可能存在的问题,并在此基础上提出了可行性的建议：第一,明确监管范围,免除伦理审查是一种特殊的审查方式,而非不进行伦理审查;第二,全面评估风险,对研究的风险判断不仅要考虑因研究给个人带来的生理风险,还应考虑其心理、经济、社会以及法律等方面的风险,尤其是对最小风险应明确界定;第三,界定前置条件中的具体概念,以及在此基础上适用情形的判断,制定具体、合理、合法的实施细则,为免除伦理审查的实施提供参考。

     

Social networks with two sets of actors

Traditional network research analyzes relational ties within a single group of actors: the models presented in this paper involve relational ties exist beteen two distinct sets of actors. Statistical models for traditional networks in which relations are measured within a group simplify when modeling unidirectional relations measured between groups. The traditional paradigm results in a one-mode socionatrix; the network paradigm considered in this paper results in a two-mode socionatrix; A statistical model is presented, illustrated on a sample data set, and compared to its traditional counterpart. Extensions are discussed, including those that model multivariate relations simultaneously, and those that allow for the inclustion of attributes of the individuals in the group.We thank the Editor and two anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments. We are also grateful to George Barnett for allowing us to analyze his data.     

认知诊断缺失数据处理方法的比较：零替换、多重插补与极大似然估计法

数据缺失在测验中经常发生, 认知诊断评估也不例外, 数据缺失会导致诊断结果的偏差。首先, 通过模拟研究在多种实验条件下比较了常用的缺失数据处理方法。结果表明：(1)缺失数据导致估计精确性下降, 随着人数与题目数量减少、缺失率增大、题目质量降低, 所有方法的PCCR均下降, Bias绝对值和RMSE均上升。(2)估计题目参数时, EM法表现最好, 其次是MI, FIML和ZR法表现不稳定。(3)估计被试知识状态时, EM和FIML表现最好, MI和ZR表现不稳定。其次, 在PISA2015实证数据中进一步探索了不同方法的表现。综合模拟和实证研究结果, 推荐选用EM或FIML法进行缺失数据处理。     

个人化设计在临床研究中的应用——从个体角度研究个体差异

本文从有关研究证据的基础上,介绍了个人化设计的理论基础和实验设计,并在此基础上讨论了个人化设计在临床研究领域中的应用价值,总结出一种适合临床病人使用的研究程序。个人化设计允许对个体的个人价值进行分析,并能同时研究不同刺激信息的作用,在个体水平上分析个体差异。通过简化了的实验程序,个人化设计为解决临床研究中的问题提供了一种新的思维方式。文中还对相关研究法的局限进行了讨论。     

医疗机器人的伦理风险与治理探析——基于“医−患−机”分析框架

基于“医−患−机”分析框架,医疗机器人的不断发展面临主体资质复杂、责任认定困难等责任伦理风险,医患关系重构、医患信任危机等医患伦理风险,数据质量与数据隐私等数据伦理风险,算法安全与算法偏见等算法伦理风险以及医疗资源分配正义风险。医疗机器人的伦理治理要以医学伦理和机器人伦理准则为依据,建立多元伦理治理体制,推动学术共同体的构建,探索自愿型、调节型与管制型等伦理治理工具的组合运用,加快医疗机器人伦理治理的法治化发展。

     

Psychometric properties and factor structure of the Fear Questionnaire phobia subscale items in two normative samples

Normative data for the Fear Questionnaire (Marks & Mathews, 1979), a popular self-report instrument measuring phobic concerns, were collected from both a community and a collegiate sample. The covariation and internal consistency of the blood-injury phobia (BI), social phobia (SO), and agoraphobia (AG) subscales were assessed in each sample, and the factor structure of the items from these three subscales was examined. Results indicated that, in general, community subjects reported more phobic concerns than did collegiate subjects, and females reported greater phobic concerns than did males. Results from confirmatory factor analyses suggest that the three factors of BI, SO, and AG did not emerge from either data set. Follow-up exploratory factor analyses did identify the general factors of blood-injury phobia and agoraphobia. Normative data from the present study are compared to those obtained previously, and directions for future research are provided.