liu.seSearch for publications in DiVA
Change search
Refine search result
123 1 - 50 of 114
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Rows per page
  • 5
  • 10
  • 20
  • 50
  • 100
  • 250
Sort
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
Select
The maximal number of hits you can export is 250. When you want to export more records please use the Create feeds function.
  • 1.
    Andersson, David
    et al.
    Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Health Technology Assessment and Health Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Health Sciences.
    Brodtkorb, Thor-Henrik
    Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Health Technology Assessment and Health Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Health Sciences.
    Tinghög, Gustav
    Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Health Technology Assessment and Health Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Health Sciences.
    DESCRIBING AND COMPARING HEALTH-RELATED QUALITY OF LIFE DERIVED FROM EQ-5D AND SF-6D IN A SWEDISH GENERAL POPULATION in VALUE IN HEALTH, vol 13, issue 7, pp A240-A2402010In: VALUE IN HEALTH, Blackwell Publishing Ltd , 2010, Vol. 13, no 7, p. A240-A240Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    n/a

  • 2.
    Andersson, Per A
    et al.
    Linköping University, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Psychology. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Erlandsson, Arvid
    Linköping University, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Psychology. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Västfjäll, Daniel
    Linköping University, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Psychology. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Tinghög, Gustav
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Prosocial and moral behavior under decision reveal in a public environment2020In: Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics, ISSN 2214-8043, E-ISSN 2214-8051, Vol. 87Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    People may act differently in public environments due to actual reputation concerns, or due to the mere presence of others. Unlike previous studies on the influence of observability on prosocial behavior we control for the latter while manipulating the former, i.e. we control for implicit reputation concerns while manipulating explicit. We show that revealing decisions in public did not affect altruistic behavior, while it increased cooperation and made subjects less likely to make utilitarian judgments in sacrificial dilemmas (i.e., harming one to save many). Our findings are in line with theoretical models suggesting that people, at large, are averse to standing out in both positive and negative ways when it comes to altruistic giving. This "wallflower effect" does however not seem to extend to decisions on cooperation and moral judgments made in public.

    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 3.
    Andersson, Per
    et al.
    Linköping University, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Psychology. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Tinghög, Gustav
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Linköping University, Department of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Division of Society and Health.
    Västfjäll, Daniel
    Linköping University, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Psychology. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Decis Res, OR USA.
    The effect of herd immunity thresholds on willingness to vaccinate2022In: Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, ISSN 2662-9992, Vol. 9, no 1, article id 243Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, media and policymakers openly speculated about the number of immune citizens needed to reach a herd immunity threshold. What are the effects of such numerical goals on the willingness to vaccinate? In a large representative sample (N = 1540) of unvaccinated Swedish citizens, we find that giving a low (60%) compared to a high (90%) threshold has direct effects on beliefs about reaching herd immunity and beliefs about how many others that will get vaccinated. Presenting the high threshold makes people believe that herd immunity is harder to reach (on average about half a step on a seven-point scale), compared to the low threshold. Yet at the same time, people also believe that a higher number of the population will get vaccinated (on average about 3.3% more of the population). Since these beliefs affect willingness to vaccinate in opposite directions, some individuals are encouraged and others discouraged depending on the threshold presented. Specifically, in mediation analysis, the high threshold indirectly increases vaccination willingness through the belief that many others will get vaccinated (B = 0.027, p = 0.003). At the same time, the high threshold also decreases vaccination willingness through the belief that the threshold goal is less attainable (B = -0.053, p < 0.001) compared to the low threshold condition. This has consequences for ongoing COVID-19 vaccination and future vaccination campaigns. One message may not fit all, as different groups can be encouraged or discouraged from vaccination.

    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 4.
    Arvidsson, Eva
    et al.
    Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences.
    Broqvist, Mari
    Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Linköping University, Department of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Division of Society and Health.
    Bäckman, Karin
    Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Linköping University, Department of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Division of Society and Health.
    Carlsson, Per
    Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Linköping University, Department of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Division of Society and Health.
    Garpenby, Peter
    Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Linköping University, Department of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Division of Society and Health.
    Gustavsson, Erik
    Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Linköping University, Department of Culture and Society, Division of Philosophy, History, Arts and Religion.
    Lindholm, Lars
    Umeå universitet.
    Nedlund, Ann-Charlotte
    Linköping University, Department of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Division of Society and Health. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences.
    Sandman, Lars
    Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Linköping University, Department of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Division of Society and Health.
    Tinghög, Gustav
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Waldau, Susanne
    Umeå universitet.
    Wiss, Johanna
    Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences.
    Vägen framåt2013In: Att välja rättvist: om prioriteringar i hälso- och sjukvården / [ed] Per Carlsson, Susanne Waldau, Lund: Studentlitteratur AB, 2013, Vol. Sidorna 207-214, p. 207-214Chapter in book (Other academic)
    Abstract [sv]

    Som vi visat har utvecklingen av metoder och strukturer för öppna prioriteringar i Sverige kommit långt. Många frågor återstår likväl. Under vårt arbete med denna bok har vi identifierat ett antal förbättringsområden och utmaningar som vi avslutningsvis vill lyfta fram. Det rör sig om vilka som ska delta i prioriteringarna, tydliggörande av värdegrunden, behov av bättre kunskap, baserad på både vetenskaplig metod och erfarenhet, och fortsatt utveckling av prioriteringsprocesser på olika nivåer och i olika sammanhang. Även om vi i Sverige skulle nå en god enighet kring principer och kriterier för prioriteringar så kommer vi alltid finna många olika sätt att praktiskt lösa specifika prioriteringsproblem.

  • 5.
    Azevedo, Flavio
    et al.
    Univ Cambridge, England; Friedrich Schiller Univ Jena, Germany.
    Pavlovic, Tomislav
    Inst Social Sci Ivo Pilar, Croatia.
    Rego, Gabriel G.
    Univ Prebiteriana Mackenzie, Brazil.
    Ay, F. Ceren
    Norwegian Sch Econ, Norway; Telenor Res, Norway.
    Gjoneska, Biljana
    Macedonian Acad Sci & Arts, North Macedonia.
    Etienne, Tom W.
    Kieskompas Election Compass, Netherlands; Univ Penn, PA 19104 USA; Univ Penn, PA 19104 USA.
    Ross, Robert M.
    Macquarie Univ, Australia.
    Schoenegger, Philipp
    Univ St Andrews, Scotland; Univ St Andrews, Scotland.
    Riano-Moreno, Julian C.
    Cooperat Univ Colombia, Colombia; El Bosque Univ, Colombia.
    Cichocka, Aleksandra
    Univ Kent, England.
    Capraro, Valerio
    Middlesex Univ London, England.
    Cian, Luca
    Univ Virginia, VA USA.
    Longoni, Chiara
    Boston Univ, MA 02215 USA.
    Chan, Ho Fai
    Queensland Univ Technol, Australia; Queensland Univ Technol, Australia.
    Van Bavel, Jay J.
    NYU, NY USA.
    Sjastad, Hallgeir
    Norwegian Sch Econ, Norway.
    Nezlek, John B.
    SWPS Univ Social Sci & Humanities, Poland; Coll William & Mary, VA USA.
    Alfano, Mark
    Macquarie Univ, Australia.
    Gelfand, Michele J.
    Stanford Univ, CA 94305 USA.
    Birtel, Michele D.
    Univ Greenwich, England.
    Cislak, Aleksandra
    SWPS Univ Social Sci & Humanities, Poland.
    Lockwood, Patricia L.
    Univ Oxford, England; Univ Birmingham, England.
    Abts, Koen
    Katholieke Univ Leuven, Belgium.
    Agadullina, Elena
    Natl Res Univ Higher Sch Econ HSE, Russia.
    Aruta, John Jamir Benzon
    De La Salle Univ, Philippines.
    Besharati, Sahba Nomvula
    Univ Witwatersrand, South Africa.
    Bor, Alexander
    Aarhus Univ, Denmark.
    Choma, Becky L.
    Toronto Metropolitan Univ, Canada.
    Crabtree, Charles David
    Dartmouth Coll, NH 03755 USA.
    Cunningham, William A.
    Univ Toronto, Canada.
    De, Koustav
    Univ Kentucky, KY USA.
    Ejaz, Waqas
    NUST, Pakistan.
    Elbaek, Christian T.
    Aarhus Univ, Denmark.
    Findor, Andrej
    Comenius Univ, Slovakia.
    Flichtentrei, Daniel
    IntraMed, Argentina.
    Franc, Renata
    Inst Social Sci Ivo Pilar, Croatia.
    Gruber, June
    Univ Colorado, CO 80309 USA.
    Gualda, Estrella
    Univ Huelva, Spain; Univ Huelva, Spain.
    Horiuchi, Yusaku
    Dartmouth Coll, NH 03755 USA.
    Huynh, Toan Luu Duc
    WHU Otto Beisheim Sch Management, Germany.
    Ibanez, Agustin
    Univ Adolfo Ibanez, Chile; Univ San Andres, Argentina; Univ Calif San Francisco, CA 94143 USA; TCD, Ireland.
    Imran, Mostak Ahamed
    Univ Dhaka, Bangladesh.
    Israelashvili, Jacob
    Hebrew Univ Jerusalem, Israel.
    Jasko, Katarzyna
    Jagiellonian Univ, Poland.
    Kantorowicz, Jaroslaw
    Leiden Univ, Netherlands.
    Kantorowicz-Reznichenko, Elena
    Erasmus Univ, Netherlands.
    Krouwel, Andre
    Vrije Univ VU Amsterdam, Netherlands.
    Laakasuo, Michael
    Univ Helsinki, Finland.
    Lamm, Claus
    Univ Vienna, Austria.
    Leygue, Caroline
    Univ Nacl Autonoma Mexico, Mexico.
    Lin, Ming-Jen
    Natl Taiwan Univ, Taiwan; Natl Taiwan Univ, Taiwan.
    Mansoor, Mohammad Sabbir
    Tribhuvan Univ, Nepal.
    Marie, Antoine
    Aarhus Univ, Denmark.
    Mayiwar, Lewend
    BI Norwegian Business Sch, Norway.
    Mazepus, Honorata
    Leiden Univ, Netherlands; Leiden Univ, Netherlands.
    McHugh, Cillian
    Univ Limerick, Ireland.
    Minda, John Paul
    Univ Western Ontario, Canada.
    Mitkidis, Panagiotis
    Aarhus Univ, Denmark; Duke Univ, NC USA.
    Olsson, Andreas
    Karolinska Inst, Sweden.
    Otterbring, Tobias
    Univ Agder, Norway; Inst Retail Econ, Sweden.
    Packer, Dominic J.
    Lehigh Univ, PA 18015 USA.
    Perry, Anat
    Hebrew Univ Jerusalem, Israel.
    Petersen, Michael Bang
    Aarhus Univ, Denmark.
    Puthillam, Arathy
    Monk Prayogshala, India.
    Rothmund, Tobias
    Friedrich Schiller Univ Jena, Germany.
    Santamaria-Garcia, Hernando
    Pontifical Javeriana Univ, Colombia.
    Schmid, Petra C.
    Swiss Fed Inst Technol, Switzerland.
    Stoyanov, Drozdstoy
    Med Univ Plovdiv, Bulgaria.
    Tewari, Shruti
    Indian Inst Management, India.
    Todosijevic, Bojan
    Inst Social Sci, Serbia.
    Tsakiris, Manos
    Royal Holloway Univ London, England; Univ London, England; Univ Luxembourg, Luxembourg.
    Tung, Hans H.
    Natl Taiwan Univ, Taiwan; Natl Taiwan Univ, Taiwan.
    Umbres, Radu G.
    Natl Sch Polit Studies & Publ Adm, Romania.
    Vanags, Edmunds
    Univ Latvia, Latvia.
    Vlasceanu, Madalina
    Princeton Univ, NJ 08544 USA.
    Vonasch, Andrew
    Univ Canterbury, New Zealand.
    Yucel, Meltem
    Duke Univ, NC USA; Univ Virginia, VA 22903 USA.
    Zhang, Yucheng
    Hebei Univ Technol, Peoples R China.
    Abad, Mohcine
    Mohammed VI Polytech Univ, Morocco.
    Adler, Eli
    Hebrew Univ Jerusalem, Israel.
    Akrawi, Narin
    Inst Res & Dev Kurdistan, Iraq.
    Mdarhri, Hamza Alaoui
    Mohammed VI Polytech Univ, Morocco.
    Amara, Hanane
    Impact Dev, Morocco.
    Amodio, David M.
    NYU, NY USA; Univ Amsterdam, Netherlands.
    Antazo, Benedict G.
    Jose Rizal Univ, Philippines.
    Apps, Matthew
    Univ Birmingham, England.
    Ba, Mouhamadou Hady
    Univ Cheikh Anta Diop, Senegal.
    Barbosa, Sergio
    Univ Rosario, Colombia; Univ Rosario, Colombia.
    Bastian, Brock
    Univ Melbourne, Australia.
    Berg, Anton
    Univ Helsinki, Finland.
    Bernal-Zarate, Maria P.
    Cooperat Univ Colombia, Colombia.
    Bernstein, Michael
    Penn State Abington, PA USA.
    Bialek, Michal
    Univ Wroclaw, Poland.
    Bilancini, Ennio
    IMT Sch Adv Studies Lucca, Italy.
    Bogatyreva, Natalia
    Natl Res Univ Higher Sch Econ HSE, Russia.
    Boncinelli, Leonardo
    Univ Florence, Italy.
    Booth, Jonathan E.
    London Sch Econ & Polit Sci, England.
    Borau, Sylvie
    Univ Toulouse, France.
    Buchel, Ondrej
    Minist Labor Family & Social Affairs Slovak Repub, Slovakia; Slovak Acad Sci, Slovakia.
    Cameron, C. Daryl
    Penn State Univ, PA 16802 USA; Penn State Univ, PA 16802 USA.
    Carvalho, Chrissie F.
    Univ Fed Santa Catarina, Brazil.
    Celadin, Tatiana
    Univ Bologna, Italy.
    Cerami, Chiara
    Inst Adv Study Pavia, Italy; Neurol Inst Fdn Casimiro Mondino, Italy.
    Chalise, Hom Nath
    Tribhuvan Univ, Nepal.
    Cheng, Xiaojun
    Shenzhen Univ, Peoples R China.
    Cockcroft, Kate
    Univ Witwatersrand, South Africa.
    Conway, Jane
    Univ Toulouse 1 Capitole, France.
    Cordoba-Delgado, Mateo Andres
    Pontifical Javeriana Univ, Colombia.
    Crespi, Chiara
    Neurol Inst Fdn Casimiro Mondino, Italy; Univ Pavia, Italy.
    Crouzevialle, Marie
    Swiss Fed Inst Technol, Switzerland.
    Cutler, Jo
    Univ Oxford, England; Univ Birmingham, England.
    Cypryanska, Marzena
    SWPS Univ Social Sci & Humanities, Poland.
    Dabrowska, Justyna
    Cracow Univ Econ, Poland.
    Daniels, Michael A.
    Univ British Columbia, Canada.
    Davis, Victoria H.
    Univ Toronto, Canada.
    Dayley, Pamala N.
    Univ Calif Los Angeles, CA USA.
    Delouvee, Sylvain
    Rennes 2 Univ, France.
    Denkovski, Ognjan
    Univ Amsterdam, Netherlands.
    Dezecache, Guillaume
    Clermont Auvergne Univ, France.
    Dhaliwal, Nathan A.
    Univ British Columbia, Canada.
    Diato, Alelie B.
    Cavite State Univ Trias City Campus, Philippines.
    Di Paolo, Roberto
    IMT Sch Adv Studies Lucca, Italy.
    Drosinou, Marianna
    Univ Helsinki, Finland.
    Dulleck, Uwe
    Queensland Univ Technol, Australia; Queensland Univ Technol, Australia; Australian Natl Univ, Australia; Univ Munich, Germany.
    Ekmanis, Janis
    Univ Latvia, Latvia.
    Ertan, Arhan S.
    Bogazici Univ, Turkiye.
    Farhana, Hapsa Hossain
    Univ Dhaka, Bangladesh.
    Farkhari, Fahima
    Friedrich Schiller Univ Jena, Germany.
    Farmer, Harry
    Univ Greenwich, England.
    Fenwick, Ali
    Hult Int Business Sch Dubai, U Arab Emirates.
    Fidanovski, Kristijan
    Univ Oxford, England.
    Flew, Terry
    Univ Sydney, Australia.
    Fraser, Shona
    Univ Witwatersrand, South Africa.
    Frempong, Raymond Boadi
    Univ Bayreuth, Germany.
    Fugelsang, Jonathan A.
    Univ Waterloo, Canada.
    Gale, Jessica
    Univ Canterbury, New Zealand.
    Garcia-Navarro, E. Begona
    Univ Huelva, Spain.
    Garladinne, Prasad
    Indian Inst Management, India.
    Ghajjou, Oussama
    Univ Bradford, England.
    Gkinopoulos, Theofilos
    Philosophy & Social Studies Dept, Greece.
    Gray, Kurt
    Univ N Carolina, NC 27515 USA.
    Griffin, Siobhan M.
    Univ Limerick, Ireland.
    Gronfeldt, Bjarki
    Univ Kent, England.
    Guemren, Mert
    Koc Univ, Turkiye.
    Gurung, Ranju Lama
    Tribhuvan Univ, Nepal.
    Halperin, Eran
    Hebrew Univ Jerusalem, Israel.
    Harris, Elizabeth
    NYU, NY USA.
    Herzon, Volo
    Univ Helsinki, Finland.
    Hruska, Matej
    Comenius Univ, Slovakia.
    Huang, Guanxiong
    City Univ Hong Kong, Peoples R China.
    Hudecek, Matthias F. C.
    Univ Regensburg, Germany.
    Isler, Ozan
    Queensland Univ Technol, Australia; Queensland Univ Technol, Australia.
    Jangard, Simon
    Karolinska Inst, Sweden.
    Jorgensen, Frederik J.
    Aarhus Univ, Denmark.
    Kachanoff, Frank
    Univ N Carolina, NC 27515 USA.
    Kahn, John
    Dartmouth Coll, NH 03755 USA.
    Dangol, Apsara Katuwal
    Tribhuvan Univ, Nepal.
    Keudel, Oleksandra
    Free Univ Berlin, Germany.
    Koppel, Lina
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Koverola, Mika
    Univ Helsinki, Finland.
    Kubin, Emily
    Univ Koblenz Landau, Germany.
    Kunnari, Anton
    Univ Helsinki, Finland.
    Kutiyski, Yordan
    Kieskompas Election Compass, Netherlands.
    Laguna, Oscar Moreda
    Kieskompas Election Compass, Netherlands.
    Leota, Josh
    Univ Alberta, Canada.
    Lermer, Eva
    Ludwig Maximilian Univ Munich, Germany; Augsburg Univ Appl Sci, Germany.
    Levy, Jonathan
    Reichman Univ, Israel; Aalto Univ, Finland.
    Levy, Neil
    Macquarie Univ, Australia.
    Li, Chunyun
    London Sch Econ & Polit Sci, England.
    Long, Elizabeth U.
    Univ Toronto, Canada.
    Maglic, Marina
    Inst Social Sci Ivo Pilar, Croatia.
    McCashin, Darragh
    Dublin City Univ, Ireland.
    Metcalf, Alexander L.
    Univ Montana, MT 59812 USA.
    Miklousic, Igor
    Inst Social Sci Ivo Pilar, Croatia.
    El Mimouni, Soulaimane
    Impact Dev, Morocco.
    Miura, Asako
    Osaka Univ, Japan.
    Molina-Paredes, Juliana
    Pontifical Javeriana Univ, Colombia.
    Monroy-Fonseca, Cesar
    SEELE Neurosci, Mexico.
    Morales-Marente, Elena
    Univ Huelva, Spain.
    Moreau, David
    Univ Auckland, New Zealand.
    Muda, Rafal
    Marie Curie Sklodowska Univ, Poland.
    Myer, Annalisa
    Univ Virginia, VA 22903 USA; CUNY, NY USA.
    Nash, Kyle
    Univ Alberta, Canada.
    Nesh-Nash, Tarik
    Impact Dev, Morocco.
    Nitschke, Jonas P.
    Univ Vienna, Austria.
    Nurse, Matthew S.
    Australian Natl Univ, Australia.
    Ohtsubo, Yohsuke
    Univ Tokyo, Japan.
    de Mello, Victoria Oldemburgo
    Univ Toronto, Canada.
    OMadagain, Cathal
    Mohammed VI Polytech Univ, Morocco.
    Onderco, Michal
    Erasmus Univ, Netherlands.
    Palacios-Galvez, M. Soledad
    Univ Huelva, Spain.
    Palomoeki, Jussi
    Univ Helsinki, Finland.
    Pan, Yafeng
    Karolinska Inst, Sweden.
    Papp, Zsofia
    Hungarian Acad Sci, Hungary.
    Paernamets, Philip
    Karolinska Inst, Sweden.
    Paruzel-Czachura, Mariola
    Univ Silesia, Poland; Univ Complutense Madrid, Spain.
    Pavlovic, Zoran
    Univ Belgrade, Serbia.
    Payan-Gomez, Cesar
    Univ Nacl Colombia, Colombia.
    Perander, Silva
    Univ Helsinki, Finland.
    Pitman, Michael Mark
    Univ Witwatersrand, South Africa.
    Prasad, Rajib
    Vidyasagar Coll Women, India.
    Pyrkosz-Pacyna, Joanna
    AGH Univ Sci & Technol, Poland.
    Rathje, Steve
    Univ Cambridge, England.
    Raza, Ali
    Univ Colorado, CO 80309 USA; Univ Colorado, CO 80309 USA.
    Rhee, Kasey
    Stanford Univ, CA 94305 USA.
    Robertson, Claire E.
    NYU, NY USA.
    Rodriguez-Pascual, Ivan
    Univ Huelva, Spain.
    Saikkonen, Teemu
    Univ Turku, Finland.
    Salvador-Ginez, Octavio
    Univ Nacl Autonoma Mexico, Mexico.
    Santi, Gaia C.
    Inst Adv Study Pavia, Italy.
    Santiago-Tovar, Natalia
    Cooperat Univ Colombia, Colombia.
    Savage, David
    Univ Newcastle, Australia.
    Scheffer, Julian A.
    Penn State Univ, PA 16802 USA.
    Schultner, David T.
    Univ Amsterdam, Netherlands.
    Schutte, Enid M.
    Univ Witwatersrand, South Africa.
    Scott, Andy
    Univ Alberta, Canada.
    Sharma, Madhavi
    Tribhuvan Univ, Nepal.
    Sharma, Pujan
    Tribhuvan Univ, Nepal.
    Skali, Ahmed
    Univ Groningen, Netherlands.
    Stadelmann, David
    Univ Bayreuth, Germany.
    Stafford, Clara Alexandra
    Univ Western Ontario, Canada; Univ Western Ontario, Canada; Univ Western Ontario, Canada.
    Stanojevic, Dragan
    Univ Belgrade, Serbia.
    Stefaniak, Anna
    Carleton Univ, Canada.
    Sternisko, Anni
    NYU, NY USA.
    Stoica, Augustin
    Natl Univ Polit Studies & Publ Adm SNSPA, Romania.
    Stoyanova, Kristina K.
    Med Univ Plovdiv, Bulgaria.
    Strickland, Brent
    Mohammed VI Polytech Univ, Morocco; PSL Res Univ, France.
    Sundvall, Jukka
    Univ Helsinki, Finland.
    Thomas, Jeffrey P.
    Univ Melbourne, Australia.
    Tinghög, Gustav
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Torgler, Benno
    Queensland Univ Technol, Australia; Queensland Univ Technol, Australia; CREMA, Switzerland.
    Traast, Iris J.
    Univ Amsterdam, Netherlands.
    Tucciarelli, Raffaele
    Univ London, England; UCL, England.
    Tyrala, Michael
    Hong Kong Univ Sci & Technol, Peoples R China.
    Ungson, Nick D.
    Susquehanna Univ, PA USA.
    Uysal, Mete S.
    Dokuz Eylul Univ, Turkiye.
    Van Lange, Paul A. M.
    Vrije Univ Amsterdam, Netherlands.
    van Prooijen, Jan-Willem
    Vrije Univ Amsterdam, Netherlands.
    van Rooy, Dirk
    Univ Antwerp, Belgium.
    Vaestfjäll, Daniel
    Linköping University, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Psychology. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Verkoeijen, Peter
    Erasmus Univ, Netherlands.
    Vieira, Joana B.
    Karolinska Inst, Sweden.
    von Sikorski, Christian
    Univ Koblenz Landau, Germany.
    Walker, Alexander Cameron
    Univ Waterloo, Canada.
    Watermeyer, Jennifer
    Univ Witwatersrand, South Africa.
    Wetter, Erik
    Stockholm Sch Econ, Sweden.
    Whillans, Ashley
    Harvard Univ, MA 02138 USA.
    White, Katherine
    Univ British Columbia, Canada.
    Habib, Rishad
    Toronto Metropolitan Univ, Canada.
    Willardt, Robin
    Swiss Fed Inst Technol, Switzerland.
    Wohl, Michael J. A.
    Carleton Univ, Canada.
    Wojcik, Adrian Dominik
    Nicolaus Copernicus Univ, Poland.
    Wu, Kaidi
    Univ Calif San Diego, CA 92093 USA.
    Yamada, Yuki
    Kyushu Univ, Japan.
    Yilmaz, Onurcan
    Kadir Has Univ, Turkiye.
    Yogeeswaran, Kumar
    Univ Canterbury, New Zealand.
    Ziemer, Carolin-Theresa
    Friedrich Schiller Univ Jena, Germany.
    Zwaan, Rolf A.
    Erasmus Univ, Netherlands.
    Boggio, Paulo S.
    Univ Prebiteriana Mackenzie, Brazil.
    Sampaio, Waldir M.
    Univ Prebiteriana Mackenzie, Brazil.
    Social and moral psychology of COVID-19 across 69 countries2023In: Scientific Data, E-ISSN 2052-4463, Vol. 10, no 1, article id 272Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    The COVID-19 pandemic has affected all domains of human life, including the economic and social fabric of societies. One of the central strategies for managing public health throughout the pandemic has been through persuasive messaging and collective behaviour change. To help scholars better understand the social and moral psychology behind public health behaviour, we present a dataset comprising of 51,404 individuals from 69 countries. This dataset was collected for the International Collaboration on Social & Moral Psychology of COVID-19 project (ICSMP COVID-19). This social science survey invited participants around the world to complete a series of moral and psychological measures and public health attitudes about COVID-19 during an early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic (between April and June 2020). The survey included seven broad categories of questions: COVID-19 beliefs and compliance behaviours; identity and social attitudes; ideology; health and well-being; moral beliefs and motivation; personality traits; and demographic variables. We report both raw and cleaned data, along with all survey materials, data visualisations, and psychometric evaluations of key variables.

    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 6.
    Barrafrem, Kinga
    et al.
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Tinghög, Gustav
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Linköping University, Department of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Division of Society and Health.
    Västfjäll, Daniel
    Linköping University, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Psychology. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Decision Research, Eugene, OR, USA.
    Trust in the government increases financial well-being and general well-being during COVID-192021In: Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, ISSN 2214-6350, E-ISSN 2214-6369, Vol. 31, article id 100514Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    We investigate the antecedents of subjective financial well-being and general well-being during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. In an online survey conducted in the midst of COVID-19 pandemic with over 1000 Swedish participants we found that distrust in the government to cope with financial (but not healthcare) challenges of the pandemic was negatively related to the feeling of financial security. In a structural equation model, we also show that trust in government to deal with financial challenges of COVID-19 pandemic has a significant impact on general well-being through the mediating channel of financial well-being. In addition, trust in government to deal with healthcare challenges of COVID-19 pandemic has a significant direct impact on individuals’ general well-being. Our findings have important implications for public policy as they highlight the importance of citizens’ trust in well-functioning governmental institutions to help cope with not only healthcare, but also financial challenges of an ongoing pandemic.

    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 7.
    Barrafrem, Kinga
    et al.
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Västfjäll, Daniel
    Linköping University, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Psychology. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Decision Research, Eugene, OR, USA.
    Tinghög, Gustav
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Financial well-being, COVID-19, and the financial better-than-average-effect2020In: Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, ISSN 2214-6350, E-ISSN 2214-6369, Vol. 28, article id 100410Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    At the onset of the COVID-19 outbreak we conducted two surveys in the United Kingdom and Sweden (N=2021) regarding how people assess the near future economic situation within their household, nation, and the world. Together with psychological factors related to information processing we link these prospects to financial well-being. We find that, although generally very pessimistic, a substantial proportion of individuals believes that their households' economy will be doing substantially better than the national and global economy, suggesting a "financial better-than-average" effect. Furthermore, we find that the pessimism regarding future household economic situation and being financially ignorant are associated with decreased financial well-being, while the (inter)national economic situation is not. This study shows how contextual factors and personal aspects shape financial well-being during turbulent and stressful times.

    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 8.
    Barrafrem, Kinga
    et al.
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Västfjäll, Daniel
    Linköping University, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Psychology. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Decision Research, Eugene, OR, USA.
    Tinghög, Gustav
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Linköping University, Department of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Division of Society and Health.
    The arithmetic of outcome editing in financial and social domains2021In: Journal of Economic Psychology, ISSN 0167-4870, E-ISSN 1872-7719, Vol. 86, article id 102408Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Outcome editing refers to a set of mental rules that people apply when deciding whether to evaluate multiple outcomes jointly or separately, which subsequently affects choice. In a large-scale online survey (n = 2062) we investigate whether individuals use the same outcome editing rules for financial outcomes (e.g., a lottery win) and social outcomes (e.g., a party with friends). We also test the role of numeric ability in explaining outcome editing. Our results show that people’s preferences for combining or separating events depend on whether those events are in the financial or the social domain. Specifically, individuals were more likely to segregate social outcomes than monetary outcomes, except for when all outcomes were negative. Moreover, numeric ability was associated with preferences for outcome editing in the financial domain but not in the social domain. Our findings extend the understanding of the arithmetic operations underlying outcome editing and suggest that people rely more on calculations when making choices involving multiple financial outcomes and more on feelings when making choices involving social outcomes.

    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 9.
    Botvinik-Nezer, Rotem
    et al.
    Tel Aviv Univ, Israel; Tel Aviv Univ, Israel; Dartmouth Coll, NH 03755 USA.
    Holzmeister, Felix
    Univ Innsbruck, Austria.
    Camerer, Colin F.
    CALTECH, CA 91125 USA.
    Dreber, Anna
    Stockholm Sch Econ, Sweden; Univ Innsbruck, Austria.
    Huber, Juergen
    Univ Innsbruck, Austria.
    Johannesson, Magnus
    Stockholm Sch Econ, Sweden.
    Kirchler, Michael
    Univ Innsbruck, Austria.
    Iwanir, Roni
    Tel Aviv Univ, Israel; Tel Aviv Univ, Israel.
    Mumford, Jeanette A.
    Univ Wisconsin, WI USA.
    Adcock, R. Alison
    Duke Univ, NC USA; Duke Univ, NC USA; Univ Ghent, Belgium; Karolinska Inst, Sweden.
    Avesani, Paolo
    Fdn Bruno Kessler, Italy; Univ Trento, Italy; Karolinska Inst, Sweden.
    Baczkowski, Blazej M.
    Max Planck Inst Human Cognit and Brain Sci, Germany.
    Bajracharya, Aahana
    Washington Univ, MO 63110 USA.
    Bakst, Leah
    Boston Univ, MA 02215 USA; Boston Univ, MA 02215 USA.
    Ball, Sheryl
    Virginia Tech, VA USA; Virginia Tech, VA USA.
    Barilari, Marco
    UCLouvain, Belgium.
    Bault, Nadege
    Univ Plymouth, England.
    Beaton, Derek
    Baycrest Hlth Sci Ctr, Canada.
    Beitner, Julia
    Univ Amsterdam, Netherlands; Goethe Univ, Germany.
    Benoit, Roland G.
    Max Planck Inst Human Cognit and Brain Sci, Germany.
    Berkers, Ruud M. W. J.
    Max Planck Inst Human Cognit and Brain Sci, Germany.
    Bhanji, Jamil P.
    Rutgers State Univ, NJ USA.
    Biswal, Bharat B.
    New Jersey Inst Technol, NJ 07102 USA; Univ Elect Sci and Technol China, Peoples R China.
    Bobadilla-Suarez, Sebastian
    New Jersey Inst Technol, NJ 07102 USA.
    Bortolini, Tiago
    D’Or Institute for Research and Education (IDOR), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
    Bottenhorn, Katherine L.
    Florida Int Univ, FL 33199 USA.
    Bowring, Alexander
    Univ Oxford, England.
    Braem, Senne
    Univ Ghent, Belgium; Vrije Univ Brussel, Belgium.
    Brooks, Hayley R.
    Univ Denver, CO 80208 USA.
    Brudner, Emily G.
    Rutgers State Univ, NJ USA.
    Calderon, Cristian B.
    Univ Ghent, Belgium.
    Camilleri, Julia A.
    Res Ctr Julich, Germany; Heinrich Heine Univ Dusseldorf, Germany.
    Castrellon, Jaime J.
    Duke Univ, NC USA; Duke Univ, NC USA.
    Cecchetti, Luca
    Univ Nebraska, NE 68588 USA.
    Cieslik, Edna C.
    Res Ctr Julich, Germany; Heinrich Heine Univ Dusseldorf, Germany.
    Cole, Zachary J.
    Univ Nebraska, NE 68588 USA.
    Collignon, Olivier
    Univ Trento, Italy; UCLouvain, Belgium.
    Cox, Robert W.
    NIMH, MD 20892 USA.
    Cunningham, William A.
    Univ Toronto, Canada.
    Czoschke, Stefan
    Goethe Univ, Germany.
    Dadi, Kamalaker
    Imperial Coll London, England; Univ Oxford, England.
    Davis, Charles P.
    Univ Connecticut, CT USA; Univ Connecticut, CT USA; Univ Connecticut, CT USA.
    Luca, Alberto De
    Univ Med Ctr Utrecht, Netherlands.
    Delgado, Mauricio R.
    New Jersey Inst Technol, NJ 07102 USA.
    Demetriou, Lysia
    Imperial Coll London, England; Univ Oxford, England.
    Dennison, Jeffrey B.
    Temple Univ, PA 19122 USA.
    Di, Xin
    New Jersey Inst Technol, NJ 07102 USA; Univ Elect Sci and Technol China, Peoples R China.
    Dickie, Erin W.
    Ctr Addict and Mental Hlth, Canada; Univ Toronto, Canada.
    Dobryakova, Ekaterina
    Kessler Fdn, NJ USA.
    Donnat, Claire L.
    Stanford Univ, CA 94305 USA.
    Dukart, Juergen
    Res Ctr Julich, Germany; Heinrich Heine Univ Dusseldorf, Germany.
    Duncan, Niall W.
    Taipei Med Univ, Taiwan; TMU ShuangHo Hosp, Taiwan.
    Durnez, Joke
    Stanford Univ, CA USA; Stanford Univ, CA 94305 USA.
    Eed, Amr
    CSIC UMH, Spain.
    Eickhoff, Simon B.
    Res Ctr Julich, Germany; Heinrich Heine Univ Dusseldorf, Germany.
    Erhart, Andrew
    Univ Denver, CO 80208 USA.
    Fontanesi, Laura
    Univ Basel, Switzerland.
    Fricke, G. Matthew
    Univ New Mexico, NM 87131 USA.
    Fu, Shiguang
    Zhejiang Univ Technol, Peoples R China; Zhejiang Univ Technol, Peoples R China.
    Galvan, Adriana
    Univ Calif Los Angeles, CA USA.
    Gau, Remi
    UCLouvain, Belgium.
    Genon, Sarah
    Res Ctr Julich, Germany; Heinrich Heine Univ Dusseldorf, Germany.
    Glatard, Tristan
    Concordia Univ, Canada.
    Glerean, Enrico
    Aalto Univ, Finland.
    Goeman, Jelle J.
    Leiden Univ, Netherlands.
    Golowin, Sergej A. E.
    Leiden Univ, Netherlands.
    Gonzalez-Garcia, Carlos
    Univ Ghent, Belgium.
    Gorgolewski, Krzysztof J.
    Stanford Univ, CA 94305 USA.
    Grady, Cheryl L.
    Baycrest Hlth Sci Ctr, Canada.
    Green, Mikella A.
    Duke Univ, NC USA; Duke Univ, NC USA.
    Guassi Moreira, Joao F.
    Univ Calif Los Angeles, CA USA.
    Guest, Olivia
    Res Ctr Interact Media Smart Syst and Emerging Tech, Cyprus.
    Hakimi, Shabnam
    Duke Univ, NC USA.
    Hamilton, Paul J.
    Linköping University, Department of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, Center for Social and Affective Neuroscience. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences.
    Hancock, Roeland
    Univ Connecticut, CT USA; Univ Connecticut, CT USA.
    Handjaras, Giacomo
    IMT Sch Adv Studies Lucca, Italy.
    Harry, Bronson B.
    Western Sydney Univ, Australia.
    Hawco, Colin
    Ctr Addict and Mental Hlth, Canada.
    Herholz, Peer
    McGill Univ, Canada.
    Herman, Gabrielle
    Ctr Addict and Mental Hlth, Canada.
    Heunis, Stephan
    Eindhoven Univ Technol, Netherlands; Epilepsy Ctr Kempenhaeghe, Netherlands.
    Hoffstaedter, Felix
    Res Ctr Julich, Germany; Heinrich Heine Univ Dusseldorf, Germany.
    Hogeveen, Jeremy
    Univ New Mexico, NM 87131 USA; Univ New Mexico, NM 87131 USA.
    Holmes, Susan
    Stanford Univ, CA 94305 USA.
    Hu, Chuan-Peng
    LIR, Germany.
    Huettel, Scott A.
    Duke Univ, NC USA.
    Hughes, Matthew E.
    Swinburne Univ Technol, Australia.
    Iacovella, Vittorio
    Univ Trento, Italy.
    Iordan, Alexandru D.
    Univ Michigan, MI USA.
    Isager, Peder M.
    Eindhoven Univ Technol, Netherlands.
    Isik, Ayse I.
    Max Planck Inst Empir Aesthet, Germany.
    Jahn, Andrew
    Univ Michigan, MI 48109 USA.
    Johnson, Matthew R.
    Univ Nebraska, NE 68588 USA; Univ Nebraska, NE USA.
    Johnstone, Tom
    Swinburne Univ Technol, Australia.
    Joseph, Michael J. E.
    Ctr Addict and Mental Hlth, Canada.
    Juliano, Anthony C.
    Kessler Fdn, NJ USA.
    Kable, Joseph W.
    Univ Penn, PA 19104 USA; Univ Penn, PA 19104 USA.
    Kassinopoulos, Michalis
    McGill Univ, Canada.
    Koba, Cemal
    IMT Sch Adv Studies Lucca, Italy.
    Kong, Xiang-Zhen
    Max Planck Inst Psycholinguist, Netherlands.
    Koscik, Timothy R.
    Univ Iowa, IA 52242 USA.
    Kucukboyaci, Nuri Erkut
    Univ Nebraska, NE USA; Rutgers New Jersey Med Sch, NJ USA.
    Kuhl, Brice A.
    Univ Oregon, OR 97403 USA.
    Kupek, Sebastian
    Univ Innsbruck, Austria.
    Laird, Angela R.
    Florida Int Univ, FL 33199 USA.
    Lamm, Claus
    Univ Vienna, Austria; Univ Vienna, Austria.
    Langner, Robert
    Res Ctr Julich, Germany; Heinrich Heine Univ Dusseldorf, Germany.
    Lauharatanahirun, Nina
    US CCDC Army Res Lab, MD USA; Univ Penn, PA 19104 USA.
    Lee, Hongmi
    US CCDC Army Res Lab, MD USA.
    Lee, Sangil
    Univ Penn, PA 19104 USA.
    Leemans, Alexander
    Univ Med Ctr Utrecht, Netherlands.
    Leo, Andrea
    IMT Sch Adv Studies Lucca, Italy.
    Lesage, Elise
    Univ Ghent, Belgium.
    Li, Flora
    Fralin Biomed Res Inst, VA USA; Nanjing Audit Univ, Peoples R China.
    Li, Monica Y. C.
    Univ Connecticut, CT USA; Univ Connecticut, CT USA; Univ Connecticut, CT USA; Haskins Labs Inc, CT USA.
    Lim, Phui Cheng
    Univ Nebraska, NE 68588 USA; Univ Nebraska, NE USA.
    Lintz, Evan N.
    Univ Nebraska, NE 68588 USA.
    Liphardt, Schuyler W.
    Univ New Mexico, NM 87131 USA.
    Losecaat Vermeer, Annabel B.
    Univ Vienna, Austria.
    Love, Bradley C.
    Alan Turing Inst, England.
    Mack, Michael L.
    Univ Toronto, Canada.
    Malpica, Norberto
    Univ Rey Juan Carlos, Spain.
    Marins, Theo
    UCL, England; DOr Inst Res and Educ IDOR, Brazil.
    Maumet, Camille
    Univ Rennes, France.
    McDonald, Kelsey
    Duke Univ, NC USA.
    McGuire, Joseph T.
    Boston Univ, MA 02215 USA; Boston Univ, MA 02215 USA.
    Melero, Helena
    Univ Rey Juan Carlos, Spain; CES Cardenal Cisneros, Spain; Northeastern Univ, MA 02115 USA.
    Mendez Leal, Adriana S.
    Univ Calif Los Angeles, CA USA.
    Meyer, Benjamin
    LIR, Germany; Johannes Gutenberg Univ Mainz, Germany.
    Meyer, Kristin N.
    Univ N Carolina, NC 27515 USA.
    Mihai, Glad
    Max Planck Inst Human Cognit and Brain Sci, Germany; Tech Univ Dresden, Germany.
    Mitsis, Georgios D.
    McGill Univ, Canada.
    Moll, Jorge
    UCL, England; DOr Inst Res and Educ IDOR, Brazil; Stanford Univ, CA 94305 USA.
    Nielson, Dylan M.
    NIMH, MD 20892 USA.
    Nilsonne, Gustav
    Karolinska Inst, Sweden; Stockholm Univ, Sweden.
    Notter, Michael P.
    Univ Hosp Ctr, Switzerland; Univ Lausanne, Switzerland.
    Olivetti, Emanuele
    Fdn Bruno Kessler, Italy; Univ Trento, Italy.
    Onicas, Adrian I.
    IMT Sch Adv Studies Lucca, Italy.
    Papale, Paolo
    IMT Sch Adv Studies Lucca, Italy; Netherlands Inst Neurosci, Netherlands.
    Patil, Kaustubh R.
    Res Ctr Julich, Germany; Heinrich Heine Univ Dusseldorf, Germany.
    Peelle, Jonathan E.
    Washington Univ, MO 63110 USA.
    Perez, Alexandre
    McGill Univ, Canada.
    Pischedda, Doris
    Charite, Germany; Charite, Germany; Charite, Germany; Free Univ Berlin, Germany; Humboldt Univ, Germany; Berlin Inst Hlth, Germany; Tech Univ Berlin, Germany; Humboldt Univ, Germany; NeuroMI Milan Ctr Neurosci, Italy.
    Poline, Jean-Baptiste
    McGill Univ, Canada; Univ Calif Berkeley, CA 94720 USA.
    Prystauka, Yanina
    Univ Connecticut, CT USA; Univ Connecticut, CT USA; Univ Connecticut, CT USA.
    Ray, Shruti
    New Jersey Inst Technol, NJ 07102 USA.
    Reuter-Lorenz, Patricia A.
    Univ Michigan, MI USA.
    Reynolds, Richard C.
    NIMH, MD 20892 USA.
    Ricciardi, Emiliano
    IMT Sch Adv Studies Lucca, Italy.
    Rieck, Jenny R.
    Baycrest Hlth Sci Ctr, Canada.
    Rodriguez-Thompson, Anais M.
    Univ N Carolina, NC 27515 USA.
    Romyn, Anthony
    Univ Toronto, Canada.
    Salo, Taylor
    Florida Int Univ, FL 33199 USA.
    Samanez-Larkin, Gregory R.
    Duke Univ, NC USA; Duke Univ, NC USA.
    Sanz-Morales, Emilio
    Univ Rey Juan Carlos, Spain.
    Schlichting, Margaret L.
    Univ Toronto, Canada.
    Schultz, Douglas H.
    Dartmouth Coll, NH 03755 USA; Univ Nebraska, NE 68588 USA.
    Shen, Qiang
    Zhejiang Univ Technol, Peoples R China; Zhejiang Univ Technol, Peoples R China.
    Sheridan, Margaret A.
    Alan Turing Inst, England.
    Silvers, Jennifer A.
    Univ Calif Los Angeles, CA USA.
    Skagerlund, Kenny
    Linköping University, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Psychology. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Linköping University, Department of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, Center for Social and Affective Neuroscience. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences.
    Smith, Alec
    Virginia Tech, VA USA; Virginia Tech, VA USA.
    Smith, David V.
    Temple Univ, PA 19122 USA.
    Sokol-Hessner, Peter
    Univ Denver, CO 80208 USA.
    Steinkamp, Simon R.
    Res Ctr Julich, Germany.
    Tashjian, Sarah M.
    Univ Calif Los Angeles, CA USA.
    Thirion, Bertrand
    Univ Paris Saclay, France.
    Thorp, John N.
    Columbia Univ, NY 10027 USA.
    Tinghög, Gustav
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Linköping University, Department of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Division of Society and Health. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences.
    Tisdall, Loreen
    Stanford Univ, CA 94305 USA; Univ Basel, Switzerland.
    Tompson, Steven H.
    US CCDC Army Res Lab, MD USA.
    Toro-Serey, Claudio
    Boston Univ, MA 02215 USA; Boston Univ, MA 02215 USA.
    Torre Tresols, Juan Jesus
    Univ Paris Saclay, France.
    Tozzi, Leonardo
    Stanford Univ, CA 94305 USA.
    Truong, Vuong
    Taipei Med Univ, Taiwan; TMU ShuangHo Hosp, Taiwan.
    Turella, Luca
    Univ Trento, Italy.
    van t Veer, Anna E.
    Leiden Univ, Netherlands.
    Verguts, Tom
    Univ Ghent, Belgium.
    Vettel, Jean M.
    US Combat Capabil Dev Command Army Res Lab, MD USA; Univ Calif Santa Barbara, CA 93106 USA; Univ Penn, PA 19104 USA.
    Vijayarajah, Sagana
    Univ Toronto, Canada.
    Vo, Khoi
    Duke Univ, NC USA; Duke Univ, NC USA.
    Wall, Matthew B.
    Invicro, England; Imperial Coll London, England; UCL, England.
    Weeda, Wouter D.
    Leiden Univ, Netherlands.
    Weis, Susanne
    Res Ctr Julich, Germany; Heinrich Heine Univ Dusseldorf, Germany.
    White, David J.
    Imperial Coll London, England.
    Wisniewski, David
    Univ Ghent, Belgium.
    Xifra-Porxas, Alba
    McGill Univ, Canada.
    Yearling, Emily A.
    Univ Connecticut, CT USA; Univ Connecticut, CT USA.
    Yoon, Sangsuk
    Univ Dayton, OH 45469 USA.
    Yuan, Rui
    Stanford Univ, CA 94305 USA.
    Yuen, Kenneth S. L.
    Duke Univ, NC USA; LIR, Germany; Johannes Gutenberg Univ Mainz, Germany.
    Zhang, Lei
    Univ Vienna, Austria.
    Zhang, Xu
    Univ Connecticut, CT USA; Univ Connecticut, CT USA; Univ Connecticut, CT USA.
    Zosky, Joshua E.
    Univ Nebraska, NE 68588 USA; Univ Nebraska, NE USA.
    Nichols, Thomas E.
    Univ Oxford, England.
    Poldrack, Russell A.
    Stanford Univ, CA 94305 USA.
    Schonberg, Tom
    Tel Aviv Univ, Israel; Tel Aviv Univ, Israel.
    Variability in the analysis of a single neuroimaging dataset by many teams2020In: Nature, ISSN 0028-0836, E-ISSN 1476-4687, Vol. 582, p. 84-88Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Data analysis workflows in many scientific domains have become increasingly complex and flexible. Here we assess the effect of this flexibility on the results of functional magnetic resonance imaging by asking 70 independent teams to analyse the same dataset, testing the same 9 ex-ante hypotheses(1). The flexibility of analytical approaches is exemplified by the fact that no two teams chose identical workflows to analyse the data. This flexibility resulted in sizeable variation in the results of hypothesis tests, even for teams whose statistical maps were highly correlated at intermediate stages of the analysis pipeline. Variation in reported results was related to several aspects of analysis methodology. Notably, a meta-analytical approach that aggregated information across teams yielded a significant consensus in activated regions. Furthermore, prediction markets of researchers in the field revealed an overestimation of the likelihood of significant findings, even by researchers with direct knowledge of the dataset(2-5). Our findings show that analytical flexibility can have substantial effects on scientific conclusions, and identify factors that may be related to variability in the analysis of functional magnetic resonance imaging. The results emphasize the importance of validating and sharing complex analysis workflows, and demonstrate the need for performing and reporting multiple analyses of the same data. Potential approaches that could be used to mitigate issues related to analytical variability are discussed. The results obtained by seventy different teams analysing the same functional magnetic resonance imaging dataset show substantial variation, highlighting the influence of analytical choices and the importance of sharing workflows publicly and performing multiple analyses.

  • 10.
    Bouwmeester, S
    et al.
    Erasmus University, The Netherlands.
    Verkoeijen, P. P. J. L.
    Erasmus University, The Netherlands.
    Aczel, B
    Eotvos Lorand University, Hungary.
    Barbosa, F
    University of Porto, Portugal.
    Bègue, L
    Universite Grenoble Alpes, France.
    Brañas-Garza, P
    Middlesex University, UK.
    Chmura, TGH
    University of Nottingham, UK.
    Cornelissen, G
    Pompeu Fabra University, Barcelona, Spain.
    Døssing, FS
    University of Copenhagen, Denmark.
    Espín, AM
    Middlesex University, UK.
    Evans, AM
    Tilburg University, The Netherlands.
    Ferreira-Santos, S
    University of Porto, Portugal.
    Fiedler, S
    Max Planck Institute, Germany.
    Flegr, J
    Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic.
    Ghaffari, M
    Max Planck Institute, Germany.
    Glöckner, A
    University of Hagen, Germany; Max Planck Institute, Germany.
    Goeschl, T
    University of Heidelberg, Germany.
    Guo, L
    University of California, USA.
    Hauser, OP
    Harvard University, USA.
    Hernan-Gonzalez, R
    University of Nottingham, UK.
    Herrero, A
    Universite Grenoble Alpes, France.
    Horne, Z
    University of Illinois, USA.
    Houdek, P
    University of Economics, Prague, Czech Republic.
    Johannesson, M
    Stockholm University, Sweden.
    Koppel, Lina
    Linköping University, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Center for Social and Affective Neuroscience. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences.
    Kujal, P
    Middlesex University, UK.
    Laine, T
    Universite Grenoble Alpes, France.
    Lohse, J
    University of Birmingham, UK.
    Martins, EC
    Maia University, Institute ISMI/CPUP, USA.
    Mauro, C
    Catholic University of Portugal, Portugal.
    Mischkowski, D
    University of Hagen, Germany.
    Mukherjee, S
    Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, India.
    Myrseth, KOR
    Trinity College Dublin, Ireland.
    Navarro-Martínez, D
    Pompeu Fabra University, Barcelona, Spain.
    Neal, TMS
    Arizona State University, USA.
    Novakova, J
    Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic.
    Pagà, R
    Pompeu Fabra University, Barcelona, Spain.
    Paiva, TO
    University of Porto, Portugal.
    Palfi, B
    Eotvos Lorand University, Hungary.
    Piovesan, M
    University of Copenhagen, Denmark.
    Rahal, RM
    Max Planck Institute, Germany.
    Salomon, E
    University of Illinois, USA.
    Srinivasan, N
    University of Allahabad, India.
    Srivastava, A
    University of Allahabad, India.
    Szaszi, B
    Eotvos Lorand University, Hungary.
    Szollosi, A
    Eotvos Lorand University, Hungary.
    Thor, K Ø
    University of Copenhagen, Denmark.
    Tinghög, Gustav
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Trueblood, JS
    Vanderbilt University, USA.
    van Bavel, JJ
    New York University, USA.
    van ‘t Veer, A. E.
    Leiden University, The Netherlands.
    Västfjäll, Daniel
    Linköping University, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Psychology. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Decision Research, Eugene, OR, USA.
    Warner, M
    Arizona State University, USA.
    Wengström, E
    Lund University, Sweden.
    Wills, J
    New York University, USA.
    Wollbrant, CE
    University of Gothenburg, Sweden; NTNU Business School, Norway.
    Registered Replication Report: Rand, Greene, and Nowak (2012): Multilab direct replication of: Study 7 from Rand, D. G., Greene, J. D., & Nowak, M. A. (2012) Spontaneous giving and calculated greed. Nature, 489, 427–430.2017In: Perspectives on Psychological Science, ISSN 1745-6916, E-ISSN 1745-6924, Vol. 12, no 3, p. 527-542Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    In an anonymous 4-person economic game, participants contributed more money to a common project (i.e., cooperated) when required to decide quickly than when forced to delay their decision (Rand, Greene & Nowak, 2012), a pattern consistent with the social heuristics hypothesis proposed by Rand and colleagues. The results of studies using time pressure have been mixed, with some replication attempts observing similar patterns (e.g., Rand et al., 2014) and others observing null effects (e.g., Tinghög et al., 2013; Verkoeijen & Bouwmeester, 2014). This Registered Replication Report (RRR) assessed the size and variability of the effect of time pressure on cooperative decisions by combining 21 separate, preregistered replications of the critical conditions from Study 7 of the original article (Rand et al., 2012). The primary planned analysis used data from all participants who were randomly assigned to conditions and who met the protocol inclusion criteria (an intent-to-treat approach that included the 65.9% of participants in the time-pressure condition and 7.5% in the forced-delay condition who did not adhere to the time constraints), and we observed a difference in contributions of −0.37 percentage points compared with an 8.6 percentage point difference calculated from the original data. Analyzing the data as the original article did, including data only for participants who complied with the time constraints, the RRR observed a 10.37 percentage point difference in contributions compared with a 15.31 percentage point difference in the original study. In combination, the results of the intent-to-treat analysis and the compliant-only analysis are consistent with the presence of selection biases and the absence of a causal effect of time pressure on cooperation. 

    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 11.
    Brodtkorb, Thor-Henrik
    et al.
    Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Health Technology Assessment and Health Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Health Sciences. Östergötlands Läns Landsting, Heart and Medicine Center, Allergy Center.
    Zetterström, Olle
    Linköping University, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Allergy Centre. Linköping University, Faculty of Health Sciences. Östergötlands Läns Landsting, Heart and Medicine Center, Allergy Center.
    Tinghög, Gustav
    Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Health Technology Assessment and Health Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Health Sciences.
    Cost-effectiveness of clean air administered to the breathing zone in allergic asthma2010In: CLINICAL RESPIRATORY JOURNAL, ISSN 1752-6981, Vol. 4, no 2, p. 104-110Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Introduction: Airsonett Airshower (AA) is a novel non-pharmaceutical treatment for patients with perennial allergic asthma that uses a laminar airflow directed to the breathing zone of patients during sleep. It has been shown that AA treatment in addition to optimized standard therapy significantly increases asthma-related quality of life among adolescent asthmatics. However, the cost-effectiveness of AA treatment has not yet been assessed. As reimbursement decisions are increasingly guided by results from the cost-effectiveness analysis, such information is valuable for health-care policy-makers. Objective: The objective of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of adding AA treatment with allergen-free air during night sleep to optimized standard therapy for adolescents with perennial allergic asthma compared with placebo. Materials and Methods: A probabilistic Markov model was developed to estimate costs and health outcomes over a 5-year period. Costs and effects are presented from a Swedish health-care perspective (QALYs). The main outcome of interest was cost per QALY gained. Results: The Airshower strategy resulted in a mean gain of 0.25 QALYs per patient, thus yielding a cost per QALY gained of under 35 000 as long as the cost of Airshower is below 8200. Conclusions: Adding AA treatment to optimized standard therapy for adolescents with perennial allergic asthma compared with placebo is generating additional QALYs at a reasonable cost. However, further studies taking more detailed resource use and events such as exacerbations into account would be needed to fully evaluate the cost-effectiveness of AA treatment. Please cite this paper as: Brodtkorb T-H, Zetterstrom O and Tinghog G. Cost-effectiveness of clean air administered to the breathing zone in allergic asthma.

  • 12.
    Carlsson, Per
    et al.
    Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Health Technology Assessment. Linköping University, Faculty of Health Sciences.
    Alwin, Jenny
    Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Health Technology Assessment. Linköping University, Faculty of Health Sciences.
    Brodtkorb, Thor-Henrik
    Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Health Technology Assessment. Linköping University, Faculty of Health Sciences.
    Heintz, Emelie
    Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Health Technology Assessment. Linköping University, Faculty of Health Sciences.
    Persson, Jan
    Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Health Technology Assessment. Linköping University, Faculty of Health Sciences.
    Roback, Kerstin
    Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Health Technology Assessment. Linköping University, Faculty of Health Sciences.
    Tinghög, Gustav
    Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Health Technology Assessment. Linköping University, Faculty of Health Sciences.
    Nationellt system för utvärdering, prioritering och införandebeslut av icke-farmakologiska sjukvårdsteknologier: en förstudie2010Report (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    The need for a national system to evaluate medical technologies other than pharmaceuticals is being considered. Several proposals advocate establishing a type of “Treatment Benefits Board”. To highlight problems and analyse the conditions for national assessments in this context, the National Board of Health and Welfare, the Medical Products Agency, the Swedish Council on Technology Assessment in Health Care (SBU), and the Dental and Pharmaceutical Benefits Agency (TLV) jointly appointed the Centre for Medical Technology Assessment (CMT) at Linköping University to conduct a preliminary study. The preliminary study should provide a foundation for the agencies to decide whether or not the issue needs to be investigated further.

    The preliminary study aims to develop background information concerning how Sweden and other countries currently assess, prioritise, and implement decisions involving new nonpharmaceutical health technologies. The basic questions addressed are:

    1. How can nonpharmaceutical technologies be defined and categorised for the purpose of setting parameters for an approval process?
    2. How is the current process of assessment, prioritisation, and approval in Sweden structured, focusing on SBU, the Medical Products Agency, the National Board of Health and Welfare, and TLV?
    3. How have other countries organised their systems for assessment, prioritisation, and approval of nonpharmaceutical technologies?

    Within the framework of the project it was not possible to conduct detailed, onsite studies of the healthcare systems in other countries. Hence, we relied on descriptions of other countries’ systems as reported in scientific articles, reports, and official documents available from various organisations and other sources via the Internet. In some instances the information was complemented by interviewing key individuals. The same applies to the descriptions of Swedish agencies. Information concerning the prevalence of various technologies was collected from official reports/reviews and registry data. We present information from six countries where we found sufficient information to preliminarily answer the questions we formulated in advance. The countries are Australia, New Zealand, England, Spain, Italy, Canada, and the USA.

    We draw the following conclusions from the preliminary study: It is relatively complicated to define nonpharmaceutical technologies and delineate the technologies that potentially could be subject to regulation. Our practical attempts to describe the technologies that SBU Alert has assessed show that:

    surgical and medical interventions dominate, but a relatively high number of screening programmes have also been assessed;

    • medical equipment and pharmaceuticals are the predominant input factors. Active implants and biological products are also relatively common. Assistive devices and dental products are seldom considered to be primary input factors;
    • most technologies are used primarily for treatment purposes. Diagnostic technologies are also relatively common.

    By removing pharmaceuticals from the equation and combining interventions and input factors, SBU Alert arrived at 18 different categories of health technologies that it assesses. The predominant combination is surgical intervention and biomedical equipment. This is followed by surgical intervention and insertion of active implants. In the report, we propose a way to define and classify technologies that we found to be appropriate for the purpose. This does not exclude pharmaceuticals. Rather, pharmaceuticals are included as one input factor among others.

    Another aim was to produce background information describing how Sweden and other countries currently assess, prioritise, and approve new nonpharmaceutical technologies. We identified several key components that we believe are worth considering in designing a national system for assessing, prioritising, and approving new nonpharmaceutical health technologies. These components are:

    • Organisational level – At what organisational level should the approval of nonpharmaceutical health technologies take place?
    • Scope – Should an all-inclusive or selective approach be taken towards inclusion/selection of health technologies for assessment?
    • Base package – Should there be a basic list showing what is financed with public funds, or is it sufficient to present only new decisions on the margin?
    • Diversity of actors – Should a single actor, or many actors, be responsible for assessment, prioritisation, and decisions regarding financing?
    • Fact producer – Who would be most appropriate to manage the factual information base?
    • Transparency – How transparent should one be in presenting the decisionmaking process and its results?
    • Political involvement – How politically independent should the decisions be?
    • Budgetary responsibility – Should the unit that recommends or decides on approval have a budgetary responsibility?
    • New and old – Should the decisions apply both to introducing new technology and phasing out old technology?
    • Fundamental values – Should there be an explicit set of fundamental values for prioritisation, and how should it be formulated?
    • Appeals – Should there be a mechanism to appeal decisions?

    To summarise, we see a trend in other countries towards an increasing level of assessment and prioritisation in decisions regarding the introduction of nonpharmaceutical health technologies. Our preliminary impression is that nearly every system that we studied continues to develop and remains “a work in progress”. For instance, in Australia and New Zealand official inquiries are under way to suggest or present proposals for improvement.

    Our studies of systems in different countries, although limited, indicate there is no perfect system to copy directly. The way in which the various systems are organised is somewhat related to how health care is organised in the respective countries and how many resources they have decided to dedicate to this purpose. The results from our preliminary study show, however, that several countries have more experience in “approving” nonpharmaceutical-based technologies than what we have in Sweden. The most interesting countries are England, New Zealand, Canada, and Australia. Spain could also be of interest. Hence, there is good reason to consider what might be the best way to analyse these countries’ systems in detail and complement this information with data from other nations that we were unable to include in the preliminary study, e.g. the Netherlands and Israel.

    To more rigorously analyse other systems, if this project is continued, investigators should probably start from one or more models for a Swedish mechanism. To arrive at one or more tentative models in this context, the county councils should be involved in the project. The format could be a workshop that engages representatives from public agencies, county councils, and professional associations, where they jointly outline conceivable models that could then be analysed and discussed in light of the experiences of other nations.

    Download full text (pdf)
    Nationellt system för utvärdering, prioritering och införandebeslut av icke-farmakologiska sjukvårdsteknologier – en förstudie
  • 13.
    Carlsson, Per
    et al.
    Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Health Care Analysis. Linköping University, Faculty of Health Sciences.
    Tinghög, Gustav
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Health Care Analysis. Linköping University, Faculty of Health Sciences.
    Läkemedel: när är det rimligt att betala själv?2013 (ed. 1)Book (Other academic)
    Abstract [sv]

    Samhällets ekonomiska resurser är begränsade och därför finns det ingen möjlighet att offentligt finansiera alla vårdtjänster som har en positiv effekt. Prioritering och ransonering av hälso- och sjukvård är därmed ofrånkomlig. Ett sätt att göra detta på är att låta individen finansiera vissa produkter och tjänster direkt ur egen ficka. Gränsdragningen mellan det individuella och det offentliga ansvaret för finansiering av sjukvård är dock en komplex och politiskt känslig fråga, men den förtjänar likväl en öppen och konstruktiv diskussion. Vår utgångspunkt är att den svenska hälso- och sjukvården under överskådlig tid i huvudsak kommer att förbli offentligt finansierad, men vi konstaterar att en betydande andel av vården idag är privat finansierad. För att personer ska kunna ta ett eget ansvar för finansieringen krävs vissa förutsättningar. Det är därför viktigt att uppmärksamma var, när och hur det är rimligt att individen får ta ett eget ansvar för att finansiera sin vård, och när motsatsen gäller. Denna diskussion kan ta sin utgångspunkt i de etiska principer för prioriteringarsom gäller i Sverige: människovärdesprincipen, behovs-solidaritetsprincipen och kostnadseffektivitetsprincipen.

    Det övergripande syftet med denna rapport är att analysera och diskutera grunden för egenansvar vid finansiering av vård. Syftet är också att presentera ett ramverk för att bedöma lämpligheten av egenfinansiering och applicera detta ramverk på läkemedelsområdet.

    Ramverket består av sex kriterier/egenskaper kopplade till den specifika vårdinsatsen/produkten som bör vara delvis eller helt uppfyllda för att egenfinansiering ska bedömas som rimlig.

    1. Den aktuella vårdinsatsen/produkten bör vara sådan att flertalet individer har god förmåga att värdera behov och kvalitet både före och efter användning.
    2. Den aktuella vårdinsatsen/produkten bör främst utnyttjas av individer som kan betecknas som autonoma och reflekterande i sitt  beslutsfattande.
    3. Den aktuella vårdinsatsen/produkten bör ge små posi tiva externa effekter.
    4. Kostnaden för den aktuella vårdinsatsen/produkten bör vara överkomlig för de flesta som har behov av den.
    5. Efterfrågan på den aktuella vårdinsatsen/produkten bör vara tillräckligt omfattande och regelbunden för att en privat marknad ska kunna uppstå.
    6. Vårdinsatser/produkter som syftar till att förbättra prestationer, funktion eller utseende, utöver vad som anses normalt snarare än medicinsk nödvändigt, är mer lämpade för privat finansiering.

    Sammanfattningsvis dras följande slutsatser i rapporten:

    • Det finns idag en inte obetydlig mängd läkemedel som finansieras privat. Motiven för vad som finansieras privat eller offentligt är dock ofta oklara. Det finns också olikheter mellan landsting när det gäller finansiering av vårdtjänster och sjukvårdsprodukter.
    • Det finns två huvudsakliga typer av egenansvar som kan beaktas vid prioriteringsbeslut: Ansvar för egen hälsa som fokuserar på individers tidigare hälsorelaterade livsstilsval. Ansvar för egen vård som fokuserar på vilka sjukvårdstjänster individer faktiskt klarar att ombesörja och finansiera själva.
    • Ansvar för egen vård är den mest policyrelevanta formen av egenansvar eftersom det kan vara svårt att fastställa samband mellan beteende och ohälsa.
    • Tillräcklig kunskap, individuell autonomi, externa effekter, tillräcklig efterfrågan, överkomligt pris och livsstilsförbättring är relevanta faktorer att beakta vid bedömning av egenfinansiering av läkemedel. Den form av egenansvar för finansiering som presenteras i rapporten 11 är i hög grad förenlig med intentionerna i människovärdesprincipen och behovs-solidaritetsprincipen.
    • Det kan uppstå en konflikt mellan det presenterade ramverket och kostnadseffektivitetsprincipen när kostnadseffektiva läkemedel möjliggör egenansvar och därför med fördel kan finansieras privat trots en god kostnadseffektivitet.
    • Mycket dyra läkemedel som inte är kostnadseffektiva är inte heller lämpliga för egenansvar. Samtidigt har samhället svårt att neka personer tillgång till verksamma läkemedel vid svår sjukdom. För att lösa detta dilemma bör man överväga möjligheten att samhället betalar för sådana läkemedel upp till den nivå där dessa bedöms kostnadseffektiva. Kostnaden därutöver skulle patienten kunna få möjlighet att finansiera själv. Sådana lösningar innebär antagligen en rad komplikationer som behöver utredas noga.
    • För att egenansvar ska kunna tillämpas systematiskt och öppet vidprio riteringar behöver antagligen ett tidigare förslag från Socialstyrelsen till regeringen om att genomföra en översyn av den etiska plattformen aktualiseras på nytt.
    • Det är angeläget att studera i vilken utsträckning privat finansiering leder till ökade skillnader i konsumtion och hälsa inom olika socioekonomiska grupper.
    • Det finns inga perfekta lösningar för hur samhället ska dra gränsen för det offentliga åtagandet. Olika värden måste alltid balanseras mot varandra i syfte att uppnå en hälso- och sjukvård som är både rättvis och effektiv.
    Download full text (pdf)
    Läkemedel – när är det rimligt att betala själv?
  • 14.
    Carlsson, Per
    et al.
    Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Health Care Analysis. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences.
    Tinghög, Gustav
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Vilken vård bör vi betala själva?2013In: Svenska Dagbladet, ISSN 1101-2412Article in journal (Other (popular science, discussion, etc.))
    Abstract [sv]

    Det saknas tydliga principer i vården för att avgöra vad som ska finansieras privat respektive offentligt. Därför blir besluten ofta godtyckliga. Varför ska vi till exempel betala privat för glasögon medan hörapparater står det offentliga för?

  • 15.
    Eriksson, Therese
    et al.
    Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Health Care Analysis. Linköping University, Faculty of Health Sciences.
    Tinghög, Gustav
    Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Health Care Analysis. Linköping University, Faculty of Health Sciences. Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Societal Cost of Skin Cancer in Sweden in 20112015In: Acta Dermato-Venereologica, ISSN 0001-5555, E-ISSN 1651-2057, Vol. 95, no 3, p. 347-348Article in journal (Other academic)
    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 16.
    Eriksson, Thérèse
    et al.
    Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Health Care Analysis. Linköping University, Faculty of Health Sciences.
    Tinghög, Gustav
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Samhällskostnader för hudcancer 20112014Report (Other academic)
    Abstract [sv]

    Bakgrund

    Under senare år har antalet nya fall av hudcancer kraftigt ökat. I Sverige har antalet dödsfall till följd av hudcancer ökat med 38 procent mellan åren 1997 och 2011. Denna utveckling leder inte enbart till ökat mänskligt lidande i samband med sjukdom utan också till en ökad ekonomisk börda för samhället. Det är därför av stor vikt att motverka denna oroande utveckling för att undvika en allt tyngre samhällsbörda till följd av hudcancer.

    Syfte

    I denna rapport presenteras förekomsten av olika hudcancerdiagnoser i Sverige 2011 samt samhällskostnaderna relaterat till dessa diagnoser. Dessutom redovisas en sammanställning av genomförda hälsoekonomiska utvärderingar av preventiva insatser mot hudcancer som finns publicerat internationellt.

    Resultatet från studien utgör även ett viktigt kunskapsunderlag i uppföljningen och vid måluppfyllelsebedömningen av miljökvalitetsmåletSäker strålmiljö.

    Resultat

    De totala kostnaderna för hudcancer i Sverige år 2011 beräknas till 1,58 miljarder kronor. Direkta kostnader (dvs. sjukvårdskostnader) uppgick till 909 miljoner kronor (58 procent), medan indirekta kostnader(dvs. produktionsbortfall) uppgick till 671 miljoner kronor (42 procent). Malignt melanom är den enskilda hudcancerdiagnos som står för de största samhällskostnaderna, 830 miljoner kronor. Det är framförallt kostnaderna kopplade till produktionsbortfall vid dödsfall som bidrar till att malignt melanom är den samhällsekonomiskt mest belastande hudcancerformen. Icke melanom hudcancer står dock för de största sjukvårdskostnaderna, 348 miljoner kronor. Detta beror främst på att dessa cancertyper sammantaget är betydligt vanligare förekommande än malignt melanom. Kostnaderna som presenteras i rapporten visar på en ökning med 331 miljoner kronor jämfört med de kostnader som presenterades år 2005 i en rapport av Tinghög et al på uppdrag av Statens strålskyddsinstitut (SSI).

    Konklusioner

    Den sammantagna slutsatsen baserad på litteraturöversikten av hälsoekonomiska utvärderingar av preventiva metoder mot hudcancer är att det idag saknas studier relevanta för den svenska kontexten där kostnadseffe - tiviteten bedömts. Svårigheten att kunna genomföra randomiserade kontrollerade studier är en bidragande orsak till detta. Framöver bör initiativ för att beräkna kostnadseffektivi eten av preventiva åtgärder efterlysas.

    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
    Download (jpg)
    presentationsbild
  • 17.
    Erlandsson, Arvid
    et al.
    Linköping University, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Psychology. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Nilsson, Arthur
    Lund University, Department of Psychology, Lund, Sweden.
    Tinghög, Gustav
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Västfjäll, Daniel
    Linköping University, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Psychology. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Decision Research, Eugene, OR, United States of America.
    Bullshit-sensitivity predicts prosocial behavior2018In: PLOS ONE, E-ISSN 1932-6203, Vol. 13, no 7, article id e0201474Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Bullshit-sensitivity is the ability to distinguish pseudo-profound bullshit sentences (e.g. “Your movement transforms universal observations”) from genuinely profound sentences (e.g. “The person who never made a mistake never tried something new”). Although bullshit-sensitivity has been linked to other individual difference measures, it has not yet been shown to predict any actual behavior. We therefore conducted a survey study with over a thousand participants from a general sample of the Swedish population and assessed participants’ bullshit-receptivity (i.e. their perceived meaningfulness of seven bullshit sentences) and profoundness-receptivity (i.e. their perceived meaningfulness of seven genuinely profound sentences), and used these variables to predict two types of prosocial behavior (self-reported donations and a decision to volunteer for charity). Despite bullshit-receptivity and profoundness-receptivity being positively correlated with each other, logistic regression analyses showed that profoundness-receptivity had a positive association whereas bullshit-receptivity had a negative association with both types of prosocial behavior. These relations held up for the most part when controlling for potentially intermediating factors such as cognitive ability, time spent completing the survey, sex, age, level of education, and religiosity. The results suggest that people who are better at distinguishing the pseudo-profound from the actually profound are more prosocial.

    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 18.
    Erlandsson, Arvid
    et al.
    Linköping University, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Psychology. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Nilsson, Artur
    Lund Univ, Sweden.
    Tinghög, Gustav
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Andersson, David
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Västfjäll, Daniel
    Linköping University, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Psychology. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Donations to Outgroup Charities, but Not Ingroup Charities, Predict Helping Intentions Toward Street-Beggars in Sweden2019In: Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, ISSN 0899-7640, E-ISSN 1552-7395, Vol. 48, no 4, p. 814-838Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This article investigates how donation behavior to charitable organizations and helping intentions toward begging European Union (EU)-migrants are related. This question was tested by analyzing survey responses from 1,050 participants sampled from the general Swedish population. Although the overall results suggested that donations to charitable organizations were positively related to helping intentions toward beggars, the results differed substantially as a function of whether the organization was perceived to focus its efforts on outgroup victims or on ingroup victims. Specifically, whereas donation behavior toward outgroup-focused organizations clearly predicted more helping intentions toward beggars (also when controlling for demographics, education, income, religiosity, and political inclination), donation behavior toward ingroup-focused organizations predicted slightly less helping intentions toward beggars. We conclude that the type of charitable organization a person donates to might tell us more about his or her values and preferences than merely whether or not he or she donates at all.

    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 19.
    Gartner, Manja
    et al.
    German Inst Econ Res DIW Berlin, Germany.
    Andersson, David
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Västfjäll, Daniel
    Linköping University, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Psychology. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Tinghög, Gustav
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Affect and prosocial behavior: The role of decision mode and individual processing style2022In: Judgment and decision making, ISSN 1930-2975, E-ISSN 1930-2975, Vol. 17, no 1, p. 1-13Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    We study the effects of experimental manipulation of decision mode (rational "brain" vs. affective "heart") and individual difference in processing styles (intuition vs. deliberation) on prosocial behavior. In a survey experiment with a diverse sample of the Swedish population (n = 1,828), we elicited the individuals processing style and we experimentally manipulated reliance on affect or reason, regardless of subjects preferred mode. Prosocial behavior was measured across a series of commonly used and incentivized games (prisoners dilemma game, public goods game, trust game, dictator game). Our results show that prosocial behavior increased for the affective ("heart") decision mode. Further, individual differences in processing style did not predict prosocial behavior and did not interact with the experimental manipulation.

    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 20.
    Gråd, Erik
    et al.
    Department of Social Sciences, Division of Economics, Södertörn University, Huddinge, Sweden,.
    Erlandsson, Arvid
    Linköping University, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Psychology. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Tinghög, Gustav
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Linköping University, Department of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Division of Society and Health. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences.
    Do nudges crowd out prosocial behavior?2021In: Behavioural Public Policy, ISSN 2398-063XArticle in journal (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    Both theory on motivational crowding and recent empirical evidence suggest that nudging may sometimes backfire and actually crowd out prosocial behavior, due to decreased intrinsic motivation and warm glow. In this study, we tested this claim by investigating the effects of three types of nudges (default nudge, social norm nudge, and moral nudge) on donations to charity in a preregistered online experiment (N = 1098). Furthermore, we manipulated the transparency of the nudges across conditions by explicitly informing subjects of the nudges that were used. Our results show no indication that nudges crowd out prosocial behavior; instead, all three nudges increased donations. The positive effects of the nudges were driven by the subjects who did not perceive the nudges as attempts to manipulate their behavior, while donations among subjects who felt that the nudges were manipulative remained unaffected. Subjects’ self-reported happiness with their choice also remained unaffected. Thus, we find no indication that nudges crowded out warm glow when acting altruistically. Generally, our results are good news for the proponents of nudges in public policy, since they suggest that concerns about unintended motivational crowding effects on prosocial behavior have been overstated.

    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 21.
    Gustavsson, Erik
    et al.
    Linköping University, Department of Culture and Society, Division of Philosophy, History, Arts and Religion. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Linköping University, Department of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Division of Society and Health. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences.
    Tinghög, Gustav
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Linköping University, Department of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Division of Society and Health. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences.
    Needs and cost-effectiveness in health care priority setting2020In: Health and Technology, ISSN 2190-7188, E-ISSN 2190-7196, Vol. 10, no 3, p. 611-619Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    How to balance the maximization of health and concerns for the worse off remains a challenge for health care decision makers when setting priorities. In regulatory guidelines these concerns are typically specified in terms of priority setting according to needs and priority setting according to cost-effectiveness. Still, it is often unclear when and why needs and cost-effectiveness diverge or overlap as guiding priority setting principles in practice. We conduct a comparative analysis of need and cost-effectiveness in the context of health care priority setting. Based on theories of distributive justice we specify three normative interpretations of need and explicate how these relate to the normative basis for cost-effectiveness analysis. Using priority-setting dilemmas we then move on to explicate when and why need and cost-effectiveness diverge as priority-setting principles. We find that: (i) although principles of need and cost-effectiveness may recommend the same allocation of resources the underlying reason for an allocation is different; (ii) while they both may give weight to patients who are worse off they do so in different ways and to different degree; and (iii) whereas cost-effectiveness clearly implies the aggregation of benefits across individuals principles of needs give no guidance with regard to if, and if so, how needs should be aggregated. Priority setting according to needs or cost-effectiveness does not necessarily recommend different allocations of resources. Thus, the normative conflict between them, often highlighted in practice, seems exaggerated. For health policy this is important knowledge because unclear conceptions may obstruct an informed public discussion. Moreover, if decision-makers are to properly account for both principles they need to recognize the inconsistencies as well as similarities between the two.

    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 22.
    Gärtner, Manja
    et al.
    DIW Berlin.
    Tinghög, Gustav
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Health Care Analysis.
    Västfjäll, Daniel
    Linköping University, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Psychology. Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Decision Research .
    Decision-making traits and states as determinants of risky choicesManuscript (preprint) (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    We test the effects of dual processing differences in both individual traits and decision states on risk taking. In an experiment with a large representative sample (N = 1,832), we vary whether risky choices are induced to be based on either emotion or reason, while simultaneously measuring individual decision-making traits. Our results show that decision-making traits are strong and robust determinants of risk taking: a more intuitive trait is associated with more risk taking, while a more deliberative trait is associated with less risk taking. Experimentally induced states, on the other hand, have no effect on risk taking. A test of state-trait interactions shows that the association between an intuitive trait and risk taking becomes weaker in the emotion-inducing state and in the loss domain. In contrast, the association between a deliberative trait and risk taking is stable across states. These findings highlight the importance of considering state-trait interactions when using dual processing theories to predict individual differences in risk taking.

  • 23.
    Hagger, Martin S.
    et al.
    Curtin Univ, Australia.
    Chatzisarantis, Nikos L. D.
    Curtin Univ, Australia.
    Alberts, Hugo
    Maastricht Univ, Netherlands.
    Anggono, Calvin Octavianus
    Brawijaya Univ, Indonesia.
    Batailler, Cedric
    Univ Grenoble Alpes, France.
    Birt, Angela R.
    Mt St Vincent Univ, Canada.
    Brand, Ralf
    Potsdam Univ, Germany.
    Brandt, Mark J.
    Tilburg Univ, Netherlands.
    Brewer, Gene
    Arizona State Univ, AZ 85287 USA.
    Bruyneel, Sabrina
    Katholieke Univ Leuven, Belgium.
    Calvillo, Dustin P.
    Calif State Univ San Marcos, TX USA.
    Campbell, W. Keith
    Univ Georgia, GA 30602 USA.
    Cannon, Peter R.
    Massey Univ, New Zealand.
    Carlucci, Marianna
    Loyola Univ, MD USA.
    Carruth, Nicholas P.
    Univ Colorado Boulder, CO USA.
    Cheung, Tracy
    Univ Utrecht, Netherlands.
    Crowell, Adrienne
    Texas AandM Univ, TX USA.
    De Ridder, Denise T. D.
    Univ Utrecht, Netherlands.
    Dewitte, Siegfried
    Katholieke Univ Leuven, Belgium.
    Elson, Malte
    Ruhr University Bochum, Bochum, Germany.
    Evans, Jacqueline R.
    Florida Int Univ, FL 33199 USA.
    Fay, Benjamin A.
    Florida Int Univ, FL 33199 USA.
    Fennis, Bob M.
    Univ Utrecht, Netherlands; Univ Groningen, Netherlands.
    Finley, Anna
    Texas AandM Univ, TX USA.
    Francis, Zoe
    Univ Toronto, Canada.
    Heise, Elke
    Tech Univ Carolo Wilhelmina Braunschweig, Germany.
    Hoemann, Henrik
    Tech Univ Carolo Wilhelmina Braunschweig, Germany.
    Inzlicht, Michael
    Univ Toronto, Canada.
    Koole, Sander L.
    Vrije Univ Amsterdam, Netherlands.
    Koppel, Lina
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Kroese, Floor
    Univ Utrecht, Netherlands.
    Lange, Florian
    Hannover Med Sch, Germany.
    Lau, Kevin
    Arizona State Univ, AZ 85287 USA.
    Lynch, Bridget P.
    Univ Georgia, GA 30602 USA.
    Martijn, Carolien
    Maastricht Univ, Netherlands.
    Merckelbach, Harald
    Maastricht Univ, Netherlands.
    Mills, Nicole V.
    Calif State Univ San Marcos, TX USA.
    Michirev, Alexej
    Maastricht Univ, Netherlands.
    Miyake, Akira
    Univ Colorado Boulder, CO USA.
    Mosser, Alexandra E.
    Florida Int Univ, FL 33199 USA.
    Muise, Megan
    Mt St Vincent Univ, Canada.
    Muller, Dominique
    Univ Grenoble Alpes, France.
    Muzi, Milena
    Potsdam Univ, Germany.
    Nalis, Dario
    Univ Bamberg, Germany.
    Nurwanti, Ratri
    Brawijaya Univ, Indonesia.
    Otgaar, Henry
    Maastricht Univ, Netherlands.
    Philipp, Michael C.
    Massey Univ, New Zealand.
    Primoceri, Pierpaolo
    Univ Zurich, Switzerland.
    Rentzsch, Katrin
    Univ Gottingen, Germany; Univ Bamberg, Germany.
    Ringos, Lara
    Loyola Univ, MD USA.
    Schlinkert, Caroline
    Vrije Univ Amsterdam, Netherlands.
    Schmeichel, Brandon J.
    Texas AandM Univ, TX USA.
    Schoch, Sarah F.
    Univ Zurich, Switzerland.
    Schrama, Michel
    Vrije Univ Amsterdam, Netherlands.
    Schuetz, Astrid
    Univ Bamberg, Germany.
    Stamos, Angelos
    Katholieke Univ Leuven, Belgium.
    Tinghög, Gustav
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Ullrich, Johannes
    Univ Zurich, Switzerland.
    vanDellen, Michelle
    Univ Georgia, GA 30602 USA.
    Wimbarti, Supra
    Gadjah Mada Univ, Indonesia.
    Wolff, Wanja
    Potsdam Univ, Germany.
    Yusainy, Cleoputri
    Brawijaya Univ, Indonesia.
    Zerhouni, Oulmann
    Univ Grenoble Alpes, France.
    Zwienenberg, Maria
    Curtin Univ, Australia; Univ Bordeaux, France.
    A Multilab Preregistered Replication of the Ego-Depletion Effect2016In: Perspectives on Psychological Science, ISSN 1745-6916, E-ISSN 1745-6924, Vol. 11, no 4, p. 546-573Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Good self-control has been linked to adaptive outcomes such as better health, cohesive personal relationships, success in the workplace and at school, and less susceptibility to crime and addictions. In contrast, self-control failure is linked to maladaptive outcomes. Understanding the mechanisms by which self-control predicts behavior may assist in promoting better regulation and outcomes. A popular approach to understanding self-control is the strength or resource depletion model. Self-control is conceptualized as a limited resource that becomes depleted after a period of exertion resulting in self-control failure. The model has typically been tested using a sequential-task experimental paradigm, in which people completing an initial self-control task have reduced self-control capacity and poorer performance on a subsequent task, a state known as ego depletion. Although a meta-analysis of ego-depletion experiments found a medium-sized effect, subsequent meta-analyses have questioned the size and existence of the effect and identified instances of possible bias. The analyses served as a catalyst for the current Registered Replication Report of the ego-depletion effect. Multiple laboratories (k = 23, total N = 2,141) conducted replications of a standardized ego-depletion protocol based on a sequential-task paradigm by Sripada et al. Meta-analysis of the studies revealed that the size of the ego-depletion effect was small with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) that encompassed zero (d = 0.04, 95% CI [-0.07, 0.15]. We discuss implications of the findings for the ego-depletion effect and the resource depletion model of self-control.

    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 24.
    Hagman, William
    et al.
    Linköping University, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Psychology. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Andersson, David
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Västfjäll, Daniel
    Linköping University, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Psychology. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Decision Research, Eugene, USA.
    Tinghög, Gustav
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Health Care Analysis. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Public Views on Policies Involving Nudges2015In: Review of Philosophy and Psychology, ISSN 1878-5158, E-ISSN 1878-5166, Vol. 6, no 3, p. 439-453Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    When should nudging be deemed as permissible and when should it be deemed as intrusive to individuals’ freedom of choice? Should all types of nudges be judged the same? To date the debate concerning these issues has largely proceeded without much input from the general public. The main objective of this study is to elicit public views on the use of nudges in policy. In particular we investigate attitudes toward two broad categories of nudges that we label pro-self (i.e. focusing on private welfare) and pro-social (i.e. focusing on social welfare) nudges. In addition we explore how individual differences in thinking and feeling influence attitudes toward nudges. General population samples in Sweden and the United States (n=952) were presented with vignettes describing nudge-policies and rated acceptability and intrusiveness on freedom of choice. To test for individual differences, measures on cultural cognition and analytical thinking were included. Results show that the level of acceptance toward nudge-policies was generally high in both countries, but were slightly higher among Swedes than Americans. Somewhat paradoxically a majority of the respondents also perceived the presented nudge-policies as intrusive to freedom of choice. Nudge- polices classified as pro-social had a significantly lower acceptance rate compared to pro-self nudges (p<.0001). Individuals with a more individualistic worldview were less likely to perceive nudges as acceptable, while individuals more prone to analytical thinking were less likely to perceive nudges as intrusive to freedom of choice. To conclude, our findings suggest that the notion of “one-nudge- fits-all” is not tenable. Recognizing this is an important aspect both for successfully implementing nudges as well as nuancing nudge theory. 

    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 25.
    Hagman, William
    et al.
    Linköping University, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Psychology. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Erlandsson, Arvid
    Linköping University, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Psychology. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Dickert, Stephan
    Queen Mary University of London, London, UK; Klagenfurt University, Klagenfurt, Austria.
    Tinghög, Gustav
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Västfjäll, Daniel
    Linköping University, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Psychology. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Decision Research, Eugene, OR, USA.
    The effect of paternalistic alternatives on attitudes toward default nudges2022In: Behavioural Public Policy, ISSN 2398-0648, Vol. 6, no 1, p. 95-118Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Nudges are increasingly being proposed and used as a policy tool around the world. The success of nudges depends on public acceptance. However, several questions about what makes a nudge acceptable remain unanswered. In this paper, we examine whether policy alternatives to nudges influence the public's acceptance of these nudges: Do attitudes change when the nudge is presented alongside either a more paternalistic policy alternative (legislation) or a less paternalistic alternative (no behavioral intervention)? In two separate samples drawn from the Swedish general public, we find a very small effect of alternatives on the acceptability of various default nudges overall. Surprisingly, we find that when the alternative to the nudge is legislation, acceptance decreases and perceived intrusiveness increases (relative to conditions where the alternative is no regulation). An implication of this finding is that acceptance of nudges may not always automatically increase when nudges are explicitly compared to more paternalistic alternatives.

    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 26.
    Hagman, William
    et al.
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Psychology. Linköping University, Department of Computer and Information Science, Human-Centered systems. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Tinghög, Gustav
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Psychology. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Linköping University, Department of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Division of Society and Health.
    Dickert, Stephan
    Univ Klagenfurt, Austria; Queen Mary Univ London, England.
    Slovic, Paul
    Decis Res, OR 97401 USA.
    Västfjäll, Daniel
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Psychology. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Decis Res, OR 97401 USA.
    Motivated Down-Regulation of Emotion and Compassion Collapse Revisited2022In: Frontiers in Psychology, E-ISSN 1664-1078, Vol. 13, article id 801150Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Compassion collapse is a phenomenon where feelings and helping behavior decrease as the number of needy increases. But what are the underlying mechanisms for compassion collapse? Previous research has attempted to pit two explanations: Limitations of the feeling system vs. motivated down-regulation of emotion, against each other. In this article, we critically reexamine a previous study comparing these two accounts published in 2011 and present new data that contest motivated down-regulation of emotion as the primary explanation for compassion collapse.

    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 27.
    Hansson, Kajsa
    et al.
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Persson, Emil
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Davidai, Shai
    Columbia Univ, NY USA.
    Tinghög, Gustav
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Losing sense of fairness: How information about a level playing field reduces selfish behavior2021In: Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, ISSN 0167-2681, E-ISSN 1879-1751, Vol. 190, p. 66-75Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Inaccurate beliefs about procedural fairness often motivate people to act in self-serving and selfish manners. We investigate whether information about a level playing field might mitigate such behaviors. In a pre-registered behavioral experiment ( n = 4 4 4), using a competitive and real-effort task, we manipulate whether participants are informed about the fairness of a competition or not. Following the competition, participants (who either won or lost the competition) decided how to distribute earnings between themselves and their opponent. We show that informing participants about the fairness of the competition reduces selfish behavior among losers, while behavior among winners remains unaffected. Moreover, we show that losers who were not informed about the fairness of the competition incorrectly viewed it as having been unfairly stacked against them (i.e., believing that they encountered significantly more difficult tasks than their opponents). Our findings suggest that information about a level playing field reduces selfish behavior and is important for understanding when and why motivated reasoning about procedural fairness helps people uphold a positive self-image. (c) 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ )

    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 28.
    Hansson, Kajsa
    et al.
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Persson, Emil
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Tinghög, Gustav
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Voting and (im)moral behavior2022In: Scientific Reports, E-ISSN 2045-2322, Vol. 12, no 1, article id 22643Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Due to diffusion of responsibility, majority voting may induce immoral and selfish behavior because voters are rarely solely responsible for the outcome. Across three behavioral experiments (two preregistered; n = 1983), we test this hypothesis in situations where there is a conflict between morality and material self-interest. Participants were randomly assigned to make decisions about extracting money from a charity either in an experimental referendum or individually. We find no evidence that voting induces immoral behavior. Neither do we find that people self-servingly distort their beliefs about their responsibility for the outcome when they vote. If anything, the results suggest that voting makes people less immoral.

    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 29.
    Karlsson, Hanna
    et al.
    Linköping University, Department of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, Center for Social and Affective Neuroscience. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Region Östergötland, Psykiatricentrum, Psykiatriska kliniken i Linköping.
    Persson, Emil
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Perini, Irene
    Linköping University, Department of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, Center for Social and Affective Neuroscience. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences.
    Yngve, Adam
    Linköping University, Department of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, Center for Social and Affective Neuroscience. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences.
    Heilig, Markus
    Linköping University, Department of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, Center for Social and Affective Neuroscience. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Region Östergötland, Psykiatricentrum, Psykiatriska kliniken i Linköping.
    Tinghög, Gustav
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Acute effects of alcohol on social and personal decision making2022In: Neuropsychopharmacology, ISSN 0893-133X, E-ISSN 1740-634X, Vol. 47, no 4, p. 824-831Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Social drinking is common, but it is unclear how moderate levels of alcohol influence decision making. Most prior studies have focused on adverse long-term effects on cognitive and executive function in people with alcohol use disorders (AUD). Some studies have investigated the acute effects of alcohol on decision making in healthy people, but have predominantly used small samples and focused on a narrow selection of tasks related to personal decision making, e.g., delay or probability discounting. Here, we conducted a large (n = 264), preregistered randomized placebo-controlled study (RCT) using a parallel group design, to systematically assess the acute effects of alcohol on measures of decision making in both personal and social domains. We found a robust effect of a 0.6 g/kg dose of alcohol on both moral judgment and altruistic behavior, but no effects on several measures of risk taking or waiting impulsivity. These findings suggest that alcohol at low to moderate doses selectively moderates decision making in the social domain, and promotes utilitarian decisions over those dictated by rule-based ethical principles (deontological). This is consistent with existing theory that emphasizes the dual roles of shortsighted information processing and salient social cues in shaping decisions made under the influence of alcohol. A better understanding of these effects is important to understand altered social functioning during alcohol intoxication.

  • 30.
    Kienzler, Mario
    et al.
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Industrial Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Science & Engineering.
    Västfjäll, Daniel
    Linköping University, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Psychology. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Decis Res, OR USA.
    Tinghög, Gustav
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Individual differences in susceptibility to financial bullshit2022In: Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, ISSN 2214-6350, E-ISSN 2214-6369, Vol. 34, article id 100655Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    What is the effect of seemingly impressive verbal financial assertions that are presented as true and meaningful but are actually meaningless; that is, financial pseudo-profound bullshit? We develop and validate a novel measurement scale to assess consumers ability to detect and distinguish financial bullshit. We show that this financial bullshit scale captures a unique construct that is only moderately correlated with related constructs such as financial knowledge, numeracy, and cognitive reflection. Consumers particular vulnerable to financial bullshit are more likely to be young, male, have a higher income, and be overconfident with regards to their own financial knowledge. The ability to detect and distinguish financial bullshit also predicts financial well-being while being less predictive of consumers self-reported financial behavior, suggesting that susceptibility to financial bullshit is linked to affective rather than behavioral reactions. Our findings have implications for the understanding of how financial communication impacts consumer decision making and financial well-being.

    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 31.
    Kirchler, Michael
    et al.
    University of Innsbruck, Austria; University of Gothenburg, Sweden.
    Andersson, David
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Bonn, Caroline
    University of Innsbruck, Austria.
    Johannesson, Magnus
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Stockholm School Econ, Sweden.
    Sorensen, Erik O.
    NHH Norwegian School Econ, Norway.
    Stefan, Matthias
    University of Innsbruck, Austria.
    Tinghög, Gustav
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Västfjäll, Daniel
    Linköping University, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Psychology. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Decis Research, OR 97401 USA.
    The effect of fast and slow decisions on risk taking2017In: Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, ISSN 0895-5646, E-ISSN 1573-0476, Vol. 54, no 1, p. 37-59Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    We experimentally compare fast and slow decisions in a series of experiments on financial risk taking in three countries involving over 1700 subjects. To manipulate fast and slow decisions, subjects were randomly allocated to responding within 7 seconds (time pressure) or waiting for at least 7 or 20 seconds (time delay) before responding. To control for different effects of time pressure and time delay on measurement noise, we estimate separate parameters for noise and risk preferences within a random utility framework. We find that time pressure increases risk aversion for gains and risk taking for losses compared to time delay, implying that time pressure increases the reflection effect of Prospect Theory. The results for gains are weaker and less robust than the results for losses. We find no significant difference between time pressure and time delay for loss aversion (tested in only one of the experiments). Time delay also leads to less measurement noise than time pressure and unconstrained decisions, and appears to be an effective way of decreasing noise in experiments.

    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 32.
    Koppel, Lina
    et al.
    Linköping University, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Center for Social and Affective Neuroscience. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Andersson, David
    Linköping University, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Center for Social and Affective Neuroscience. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Morrison, India
    Linköping University, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Center for Social and Affective Neuroscience. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences.
    Posadzy, Kinga
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Västfjäll, Daniel
    Linköping University, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Center for Social and Affective Neuroscience. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Psychology. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Decision Research, Eugene, OR, USA.
    Tinghög, Gustav
    Linköping University, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Center for Social and Affective Neuroscience. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences.
    The effect of acute pain on risky and intertemporal choice2017In: Experimental Economics, ISSN 1386-4157, E-ISSN 1573-6938, Vol. 20, no 4, p. 878-893Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Pain is a highly salient and attention-demanding experience that motivates people to act. We investigated the effect of pain on decision making by delivering acute thermal pain to participants’ forearm while they made risky and intertemporal choices involving money. Participants (n = 107) were more risk seeking under pain than in a no-pain control condition when decisions involved gains but not when they involved equivalent losses. Pain also resulted in greater preference for immediate (smaller) over future (larger) monetary rewards. We interpret these results as a motivation to offset the aversive, pain-induced state, where monetary rewards become more appealing under pain than under no pain and when delivered sooner rather than later. Our findings add to the long-standing debate regarding the role of intuition and reflection in decision making.

    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 33.
    Koppel, Lina
    et al.
    Linköping University, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Center for Social and Affective Neuroscience. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Andersson, David
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Linköping University, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Center for Social and Affective Neuroscience. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences.
    Morrison, India
    Linköping University, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Center for Social and Affective Neuroscience. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences.
    Västfjäll, Daniel
    Linköping University, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Psychology. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Linköping University, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Center for Social and Affective Neuroscience. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Decis Research, OR USA.
    Tinghög, Gustav
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Linköping University, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Center for Social and Affective Neuroscience. Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Health Care Analysis. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences.
    The (Null) Effect of Affective Touch on Betrayal Aversion, Altruism, and Risk Taking2017In: Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, ISSN 1662-5153, E-ISSN 1662-5153, Vol. 11, article id 251Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Pleasant touch is thought to increase the release of oxytocin. Oxytocin, in turn, has been extensively studied with regards to its effects on trust and prosocial behavior, but results remain inconsistent. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of touch on economic decision making. Participants (n = 120) were stroked on their left arm using a soft brush (touch condition) or not at all (control condition; varied within subjects), while they performed a series of decision tasks assessing betrayal aversion (the Betrayal Aversion Elicitation Task), altruism (donating money to a charitable organization), and risk taking (the Balloon Analog Risk Task). We found no significant effect of touch on any of the outcome measures, neither within nor between subjects. Furthermore, effects were not moderated by gender or attachment. However, attachment avoidance had a significant effect on altruism in that those who were high in avoidance donated less money. Our findings contribute to the understanding of affective touch-and, by extension, oxytocin-in social behavior, and decision making by showing that touch does not directly influence performance in tasks involving risk and prosocial decisions. Specifically, our work casts further doubt on the validity of oxytocin research in humans.

    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 34.
    Koppel, Lina
    et al.
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Linköping University, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Center for Social and Affective Neuroscience. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences.
    Andersson, David
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Linköping University, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Center for Social and Affective Neuroscience. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences.
    Västfjäll, Daniel
    Linköping University, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Psychology. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Linköping University, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Center for Social and Affective Neuroscience. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Decis Res, OR USA.
    Tinghög, Gustav
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Linköping University, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Center for Social and Affective Neuroscience. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences.
    No Effect of Ego Depletion on Risk Taking2019In: Scientific Reports, E-ISSN 2045-2322, Vol. 9, article id 9724Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    We investigated the effect of ego depletion on risk taking. Specifically, we conducted three studies (total n= 1,716) to test the prediction that ego depletion results in decisions that are more strongly in line with prospect theory, i.e., that ego depletion reduces risk taking for gains, increases risk taking for losses, and increases loss aversion. Ego depletion was induced using two of the most common manipulations from previous literature: the letter e task (Studies 1 and 3) and the Stroop task (Study 2). Risk taking was measured using a series of standard, incentivized economic decision-making tasks assessing risk preferences in the gain domain, risk preferences in the loss domain, and loss aversion. None of the studies revealed a significant effect of ego depletion on risk taking. Our findings cast further doubts about the ability of ego-depletion manipulations to affect actual behavior in experimental settings.

    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 35.
    Kvarven, Amanda
    et al.
    Univ Bergen, Norway.
    Stromland, Eirik
    Univ Bergen, Norway.
    Wollbrant, Conny
    Univ Stirling, Scotland.
    Andersson, David
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Johannesson, Magnus
    Stockholm Sch Econ, Sweden.
    Tinghög, Gustav
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Västfjäll, Daniel
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Myrseth, Kristian Ove R.
    Univ York, England.
    The intuitive cooperation hypothesis revisited: a meta-analytic examination of effect size and between-study heterogeneity2020In: Journal of the Economic Science Association (JESA), ISSN 2199-6776, E-ISSN 2199-6784, Vol. 6, no 1, p. 26-42Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    The hypothesis that intuition promotes cooperation has attracted considerable attention. Although key results in this literature have failed to replicate in pre-registered studies, recent meta-analyses report an overall effect of intuition on cooperation. We address the question with a meta-analysis of 82 cooperation experiments, spanning four different types of intuition manipulations-time pressure, cognitive load, depletion, and induction-including 29,315 participants in total. We obtain a positive overall effect of intuition on cooperation, though substantially weaker than that reported in prior meta-analyses, and between studies the effect exhibits a high degree of systematic variation. We find that this overall effect depends exclusively on the inclusion of six experiments featuring emotion-induction manipulations, which prompt participants to rely on emotion over reason when making allocation decisions. Upon excluding from the total data set experiments featuring this class of manipulations, between-study variation in the meta-analysis is reduced substantially-and we observed no statistically discernable effect of intuition on cooperation. Overall, we fail to obtain compelling evidence for the intuitive cooperation hypothesis.

    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 36.
    Kvarven, Amanda
    et al.
    University of Bergen.
    Strömland, Eirik
    Bergen University.
    Wollbrant, Conny
    Stirling University.
    Andersson, David
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Magnus, Johannesson
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Stockholm School of economics .
    Tinghög, Gustav
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Health Care Analysis. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Västfjäll, Daniel
    Linköping University, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Psychology. Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Decision Research .
    Myrseth, Kristian
    Trinity College Dublin .
    The Intuitive Cooperation Hypothesis Revisited: A Meta-analytic Examination of Effect-size and Between-study HeterogeneityManuscript (preprint) (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    The hypothesis that intuition promotes cooperation has attracted considerable attention. We address the question with a meta-analysis of 82 cooperation experiments, spanning four different types of intuition manipulations—time pressure, cognitive load, depletion, and induction—including 29,087 participants in total. To our knowledge, this is the largest and most comprehensive data set to date. We obtain a positive overall effect of intuition on cooperation, though substantially weaker than that reported in prior meta-analyses, and between studies the effect exhibits a substantial degree of systematic variation. We find that this overall effect depends exclusively on the inclusion of six experiments featuring emotion-induction manipulations, which prompt participants to rely on emotion over reason when making allocation decisions. Upon excluding from the total data set experiments featuring this class of manipulations, between-study variation in the meta-analysis is reduced substantially—and we observed no statistically discernable effect of intuition on cooperation.

  • 37.
    Lind, Therese
    et al.
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Erlandsson, Arvid
    Linköping University, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Psychology. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Västfjäll, Daniel
    Linköping University, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Psychology. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Decision Research, Eugene, OR, USA.
    Tinghög, Gustav
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Linköping University, Department of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Division of Society and Health.
    Motivated reasoning when assessing the effects of refugee intake2022In: Behavioural Public Policy, ISSN 2398-063X, Vol. 6, no 2, p. 213-236Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Do differences in worldview ideology hinder people from objectively interpreting the effect of immigration? In an experiment with Swedish adults (n = 1015), we investigate whether people display motivated reasoning when interpreting numerical information about the effects of refugee intake on crime rate. Our results show clear evidence of motivated reasoning along the lines of worldview ideology (i.e., whether people identify themselves primarily as nationally oriented or globally oriented). In scenarios where refugee intake was associated with higher crime rate, nationally oriented people were 18 percentage points more likely to make the correct assessment compared to globally oriented people. Likewise, in scenarios where refugee intake was associated with lower crime rate, nationally oriented people were 20 percentage points less likely to make the correct assessment compared to globally oriented people. Individuals with higher numeric ability were less likely to engage in motivated reasoning, suggesting that motivated reasoning more commonly is driven by feelings and emotional cues rather than deliberate analytical processes.

    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 38.
    Lind, Thérese
    et al.
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Ahmed, Ali
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Skagerlund, Kenny
    Linköping University, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Psychology. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Strömbäck, Camilla
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Västfjäll, Daniel
    Linköping University, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Psychology. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Decis Res, OR USA.
    Tinghög, Gustav
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Linköping University, Department of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Division of Society and Health. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences.
    Competence, Confidence, and Gender: The Role of Objective and Subjective Financial Knowledge in Household Finance2020In: Journal of Family and Economic Issues, ISSN 1058-0476, E-ISSN 1573-3475, Vol. 41, no 4, p. 626-638Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    We studied the association of individual differences in objective financial knowledge (i.e. competence), subjective financial knowledge (i.e. confidence), numeric ability, and cognitive reflection on a broad set of financial behaviors and feelings towards financial matters. We used a large diverse sample (N = 2063) of the adult Swedish population. We found that both objective and subjective financial knowledge predicted frequent engagement in sound financial practices, while numeric ability and cognitive reflection could not be linked to the considered financial behaviors when controlling for other relevant cognitive abilities. In addition, both objective and subjective financial knowledge served as a buffer against financial anxiety, while we did not detect similar buffering effects of numeric ability and cognitive reflection. Subjective financial knowledge was found to be a stronger predictor of sound financial behavior and subjective wellbeing than objective financial knowledge. Women reported a lower level of subjective financial wellbeing even though they reported a more prudent financial behavior than men, when controlling for sociodemographics and cognitive abilities. Our findings help to understand heterogeneity in peoples propensity to engage in sound financial behaviors and have implications for important policy issues related to financial education.

    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 39.
    Lindkvist, Amanda M.
    et al.
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics.
    Koppel, Lina
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Linköping University, Department of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, Center for Social and Affective Neuroscience.
    Tinghög, Gustav
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Bounded research ethicality: researchers rate themselves and their field as better than others at following good research practice2024In: Scientific Reports, E-ISSN 2045-2322, Vol. 14, no 1, article id 3050Article in journal (Refereed)
  • 40.
    Lindkvist, Amanda M.
    et al.
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics.
    Koppel, Lina
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics.
    Tinghög, Gustav
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics.
    Bounded research ethicality: researchers rate themselves and their field as better than others at following good research practice2024In: Scientific Reports, E-ISSN 2045-2322, Vol. 14, no 1, article id 3050Article in journal (Refereed)
  • 41.
    Lyttkens, Carl
    et al.
    Department of Economics, Lund University, Lund, Sweden .
    Gerdtham, Ulf
    Department of Economics, Lund University, Lund, Sweden .
    Tinghög, Gustav
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Health Care Analysis. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Do We Know What We Are Doing? An Exploratory Study on Swedish Health Economists and the EQ-5D2018Report (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    The UK tariff for quality of life associated with the health states in the EQ-5D is probably not consistent with the preferences of Swedish health economists. This is worrying in view of the widespread use of the tariff values and the fact that health economists likely are better able than ordinary citizens to report their preferences for health states in a valid and reliable manner. We suggest this result is taken into account when the EQ-5D instrument is used, and that researchers should be cautious in using the UK (or any other) value sets. Our results also indicate that the variation across citizens in preferences for health may be a more complex issue than previously observed and deserves further study. An intriguing question for the future is to what extent health economists use methods and instruments that they themselves do not believe in.

  • 42.
    Lyttkens, Carl
    et al.
    Lunduniversity.
    Gerdtham, Ulf
    Lund University.
    Tinghög, Gustav
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Health Care Analysis.
    Do We Know What We Are Doing? An Exploratory Study on Swedish Health Economists and the EQ-5DManuscript (preprint) (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    The UK tariff for quality of life associated with the health states in the EQ-5D is probably not consistent with the preferences of Swedish health economists. This is worrying in view of the widespread use of the tariff values and the fact that health economists likely are better able than ordinary citizens to report their preferences for health states in a valid and reliable manner. We suggest this result is taken into account when the EQ-5D instrument is used, and that researchers should be cautious in using the UK (or any other) value sets. Our results also indicate that the variation across citizens in preferences for health may be a more complex issue than previously observed and deserves further study. An intriguing question for the future is to what extent health economists use methods and instruments that they themselves do not believe in.

  • 43.
    Maguire, Allegra
    et al.
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Persson, Emil
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Tinghög, Gustav
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Linköping University, Department of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences.
    Opportunity cost neglect: a meta-analysis2023In: Journal of the Economic Science Association (JESA), ISSN 2199-6776, E-ISSN 2199-6784, Vol. 9, p. 176-192Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    In a seminal paper, Frederick et al. (J Consum Res 36:553-561, 2009) showed that peoples willingness to purchase a consumer good declined dramatically when opportunity costs were made more salient (Cohens d = 0.45-0.85). This finding suggests that people normally do not pay sufficient attention to opportunity costs and as a result make poorer and less efficient decisions, both in private and public domains. To critically assess the strength of opportunity cost neglect, we carried out a systematic review and a meta-analysis including published and non-published experimental work. In total, 39 experimental studies were included in the meta-analysis (N = 14,005). The analysis shows a robust significant effect (Cohens d = 0.22; p &lt; 0.001) of opportunity cost neglect across different domains, albeit the effect is considerably smaller than what was originally estimated by Frederick et al. (2009). Our findings highlight the importance of meta-analyses and replications of initial findings.

    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 44.
    Maguire, Allegra
    et al.
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Persson, Emil
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Västfjäll, Daniel
    Linköping University, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Psychology. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Tinghög, Gustav
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    COVID-19 and Politically Motivated Reasoning2022In: Medical decision making, ISSN 0272-989X, E-ISSN 1552-681X, Vol. 42, no 8, p. 1078-1086Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Background. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the world witnessed a partisan segregation of beliefs toward the global health crisis and its management. Politically motivated reasoning, the tendency to interpret information in accordance with individual motives to protect valued beliefs rather than objectively considering the facts, could represent a key process involved in the polarization of attitudes. The objective of this study was to explore politically motivated reasoning when participants assess information regarding COVID-19. Design. We carried out a preregistered online experiment using a diverse sample (N = 1500) from the United States. Both Republicans and Democrats assessed the same COVID-19-related information about the health effects of lockdowns, social distancing, vaccination, hydroxychloroquine, and wearing face masks. Results. At odds with our prestated hypothesis, we found no evidence in line with politically motivated reasoning when interpreting numerical information about COVID-19. Moreover, we found no evidence supporting the idea that numeric ability or cognitive sophistication bolster politically motivated reasoning in the case of COVID-19. Instead, our findings suggest that participants base their assessment on prior beliefs of the matter. Conclusions. Our findings suggest that politically polarized attitudes toward COVID-19 are more likely to be driven by lack of reasoning than politically motivated reasoning-a finding that opens potential avenues for combating political polarization about important health care topics.

    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 45.
    McCarthy, Randy J.
    et al.
    Northern Illinois Univ, De Kalb, IL 60115 USA.
    Skowronski, John J.
    Northern Illinois Univ, De Kalb, IL 60115 USA.
    Verschuere, Bruno
    Univ Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
    Meijer, Ewout H.
    Maastricht Univ, Maastricht, Netherlands.
    Jim, Ariane
    Univ Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands; Univ Ghent, Ghent, Belgium.
    Hoogesteyn, Katherine
    Maastricht Univ, Maastricht, Netherlands.
    Orthey, Robin
    Maastricht Univ, Maastricht, Netherlands; Univ Portsmouth, Portsmouth, Hants, England.
    Acar, Oguz A.
    City Univ London, London, England.
    Aczel, Balazs
    Eotvos Lorand Univ, Inst Psychol, Budapest, Hungary.
    Bakos, Bence E.
    Eotvos Lorand Univ, Inst Psychol, Budapest, Hungary.
    Barbosa, Fernando
    Univ Porto, Porto, Portugal.
    Baskin, Ernest
    St Josephs Univ, Haub Sch Business, Philadelphia, PA 19131 USA.
    Bègue, Laurent
    Univ Grenoble Alpes, Grenoble, France.
    Ben-Shakhar, Gershon
    Hebrew Univ Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel.
    Birt, Angie R.
    Mt St Vincent Univ, Halifax, NS, Canada.
    Blatz, Lisa
    Univ Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
    Charman, Steve D.
    Florida Int Univ, Miami, FL 33199 USA.
    Claesen, Aline
    Univ Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
    Clay, Samuel L.
    Brigham Young Univ Idaho, Rexburg, ID USA.
    Coary, Sean P.
    St Josephs Univ, Haub Sch Business, Philadelphia, PA 19131 USA.
    Crusius, Jan
    Univ Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
    Evans, Jacqueline R.
    Florida Int Univ, Miami, FL 33199 USA.
    Feldman, Noa
    Hebrew Univ Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel.
    Ferreira-Santos, Fernando
    Univ Porto, Porto, Portugal.
    Gamer, Matthias
    Univ Wurzburg, Wurzburg, Germany.
    Gerlsma, Coby
    Univ Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.
    Gomes, Sara
    Univ Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
    González-Iraizoz, Marta
    Univ Warwick, Coventry, W Midlands, England.
    Holzmeister, Felix
    Univ Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
    Huber, Juergen
    Univ Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
    Huntjens, Rafaele J. C.
    Univ Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.
    Isoni, Andrea
    Univ Warwick, Coventry, W Midlands, England.
    Jessup, Ryan K.
    Abilene Christian Univ, Abilene, TX 79699 USA.
    Kirchler, Michael
    Univ Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
    klein Selle, Nathalie
    Hebrew Univ Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel.
    Koppel, Lina
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Kovacs, Marton
    Eotvos Lorand Univ, Inst Psychol, Budapest, Hungary.
    Laine, Tei
    Univ Grenoble Alpes, Grenoble, France.
    Lentz, Frank
    Univ Bourgogne Franche Comte, Burgundy Sch Business CEREN, Besancon, France.
    Loschelder, David D.
    Leuphana Univ Lueneburg, Luneburg, Germany.
    Ludvig, Elliot A.
    Univ Warwick, Coventry, W Midlands, England.
    Lynn, Monty L.
    Abilene Christian Univ, Abilene, TX 79699 USA.
    Martin, Scott D.
    Brigham Young Univ Idaho, Rexburg, ID USA.
    McLatchie, Neil M.
    Univ Lancaster, Lancaster, England.
    Mechtel, Mario
    Leuphana Univ Lueneburg, Luneburg, Germany.
    Nahari, Galit
    Bar Ilan Univ, Ramat Gan, Israel.
    Özdoğru, Asil Ali
    Uskudar Univ, Istanbul, Turkey.
    Pasion, Rita
    Univ Porto, Porto, Portugal.
    Pennington, Charlotte R.
    Univ West England, Bristol, Avon, England.
    Roets, Arne
    Univ Ghent, Ghent, Belgium.
    Rozmann, Nir
    Bar Ilan Univ, Ramat Gan, Israel.
    Scopelliti, Irene
    City Univ London, London, England.
    Spiegelman, Eli
    Univ Bourgogne Franche Comte, Burgundy Sch Business CEREN, Besancon, France.
    Suchotzki, Kristina
    Univ Wurzburg, Wurzburg, Germany.
    Sutan, Angela
    Univ Bourgogne Franche Comte, Burgundy Sch Business CEREN, Besancon, France.
    Szecsi, Peter
    Eotvos Lorand Univ, Inst Psychol, Budapest, Hungary.
    Tinghög, Gustav
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Tisserand, Jean-Christian
    Univ Bourgogne Franche Comte, Burgundy Sch Business CEREN, Besancon, France.
    Tran, Ulrich S.
    Univ Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
    Van Hiel, Alain
    Univ Ghent, Ghent, Belgium.
    Vanpaemel, Wolf
    Univ Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
    Västfjäll, Daniel
    Linköping University, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Psychology. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Decision Research, Eugene, Oregon.
    Verliefde, Thomas
    Abilene Christian Univ, Abilene, TX 79699 USA.
    Vezirian, Kévin
    Univ Grenoble Alpes, Grenoble, France.
    Voracek, Martin
    Univ Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
    Warmelink, Lara
    Univ Lancaster, Lancaster, England.
    Wick, Katherine
    Abilene Christian Univ, Abilene, TX 79699 USA.
    Wiggins, Bradford J.
    Brigham Young Univ Idaho, Rexburg, ID USA.
    Wylie, Keith
    Florida Int Univ, Miami, FL 33199 USA.
    Yıldız, Ezgi
    Uskudar Univ, Istanbul, Turkey.
    Registered Replication Report on Srull and Wyer (1979)2018In: Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, ISSN 2515-2459, E-ISSN 2515-2467, Vol. 1, no 3, p. 321-336Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Srull and Wyer (1979) demonstrated that exposing participants to more hostility-related stimuli caused them subsequently to interpret ambiguous behaviors as more hostile. In their Experiment 1, participants descrambled sets of words to form sentences. In one condition, 80% of the descrambled sentences described hostile behaviors, and in another condition, 20% described hostile behaviors. Following the descrambling task, all participants read a vignette about a man named Donald who behaved in an ambiguously hostile manner and then rated him on a set of personality traits. Next, participants rated the hostility of various ambiguously hostile behaviors (all ratings on scales from 0 to 10). Participants who descrambled mostly hostile sentences rated Donald and the ambiguous behaviors as approximately 3 scale points more hostile than did those who descrambled mostly neutral sentences. This Registered Replication Report describes the results of 26 independent replications (N = 7,373 in the total sample; k = 22 labs and N = 5,610 in the primary analyses) of Srull and Wyer?s Experiment 1, each of which followed a preregistered and vetted protocol. A random-effects meta-analysis showed that the protagonist was seen as 0.08 scale points more hostile when participants were primed with 80% hostile sentences than when they were primed with 20% hostile sentences (95% confidence interval, CI = [0.004, 0.16]). The ambiguously hostile behaviors were seen as 0.08 points less hostile when participants were primed with 80% hostile sentences than when they were primed with 20% hostile sentences (95% CI = [?0.18, 0.01]). Although the confidence interval for one outcome excluded zero and the observed effect was in the predicted direction, these results suggest that the currently used methods do not produce an assimilative priming effect that is practically and routinely detectable.

  • 46.
    Meunier, Andreas
    et al.
    Linköping University, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Division of Surgery, Orthopedics and Oncology. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Region Östergötland, Center for Surgery, Orthopaedics and Cancer Treatment, Department of Orthopaedics in Linköping.
    Posadzy, Kinga
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Tinghög, Gustav
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Health Care Analysis. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences.
    Aspenberg, Per
    Linköping University, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Division of Surgery, Orthopedics and Oncology. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Region Östergötland, Center for Surgery, Orthopaedics and Cancer Treatment, Department of Orthopaedics in Linköping.
    Risk preferences and attitudes to surgery in decision making2017In: Acta Orthopaedica, ISSN 1745-3674, E-ISSN 1745-3682, Vol. 88, no 5, p. 466-471Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Background and purpose — There is increasing evidence that several commonly performed surgical procedures provide little advantage over nonoperative treatment, suggesting that doctors may sometimes be inappropriately optimistic about surgical ben- efit when suggesting treatment for individual patients. We investi- gated whether attitudes to risk influenced the choice of operative treatment and nonoperative treatment.

    Methods — 946 Swedish orthopedic surgeons were invited to participate in an online survey. A radiograph of a 4-fragment proximal humeral fracture was presented together with 5 differ- ent patient characteristics, and the surgeons could choose between 3 different operative treatments and 1 nonoperative treatment. This was followed by an economic risk-preference test, and then by an instrument designed to measure 6 attitudes to surgery that are thought to be hazardous. We then investigated if choice of non-operative treatment was associated with risk aversion, and thereafter with the other variables, by regression analysis.

    Results — 388 surgeons responded. Nonoperative treatment for all cases was suggested by 64 of them. There was no significant association between risk aversion and tendency to avoid surgery. However, there was a statistically significant association between suggesting to operate at least 1 of the cases and a “macho” atti- tude to surgery or resignation regarding the chances of influenc- ing the outcome of surgery. Choosing nonoperative treatment for all cases was associated with long experience as a surgeon.

    Interpretation — The discrepancy between available evidence for surgery and clinical practice does not appear to be related to risk preference, but relates to hazardous attitudes. It appears that choosing nonoperative treatment requires experience and a feel- ing that one can make a difference (i.e. a low score for resigna- tion). There is a need for better awareness of available evidence for surgical indications. 

    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 47.
    Mooney, Gavin
    et al.
    University of Southern Denmark.
    Tinghög, Gustav
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, The Institute of Technology.
    Kalkan, Almina
    Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Health Technology Assessment and Health Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Health Sciences.
    The Need for a New Paradigm in Scandinavian Health Economics2012In: Nordic Journal of Health Economics, ISSN 1892-9710, Vol. 1, no 2, p. 119-132Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This paper argues that the discipline of health economics has lost its way due to its persistent focus on individualistic and consequential values. The paper suggests how this might be remedied in both theory and practice. It proposes a new paradigm for health economics, which focuses on communitarian values. This new paradigm is discussed in the context of the Scandinavian welfare model.

    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 48.
    Nilsson, Artur
    et al.
    Linköping University, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Psychology. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Erlandsson, Arvid
    Linköping University, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Psychology. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Västfjäll, Daniel
    Linköping University, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Psychology. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Tinghög, Gustav
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Who are the opponents of nudging? Insights from moral foundations theory2021In: Comprehensive Results in Social Psychology, ISSN 2374-3603, Vol. 5, no 1-3, p. 64-97Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    To be able to implement nudges in an effective and ethically defensible manner, it is important to understand why some persons find nudges objectionable. Drawing on moral foundations theory, we investigated the moral roots of attitudes to pro-self nudges (which benefit the agent) and pro-social nudges (which benefit society). This registered report is based on a preregistered replication and extension (N = 607) of a first non-preregistered study (N = 629) with diverse samples of Swedish adults. We found that (a) individualizing moral intuitions concerning harm prevention and fairness were associated with the perceived acceptability of the nudges, (b) binding moral intuitions concerning in group loyalties, traditions, and sanctity were associated with the perception that nudges infringe on the agent’s freedom, and (c) individualist concern with freedom from the government’s interference in human lives, and with liberty in general, was associated with the perception that nudges restrict the agent’s freedom and are not acceptable. Opponents of nudging identified through cluster analysis exhibited high concern with liberty and low concern with individualizing and egalitarian values. These results were similar across studies and nudges, and they were consistent with our hypotheses, although individualist concern with freedom from the government specifically was the most robust unique predictor of opposition to nudges. Taken together, our findings suggest that opposition to nudges is rooted in attitudes concerning the conflict between public promotion of social goals, such as well-being, justice, or equality, and respect for the individual’s freedom from interference from the government. 

    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 49.
    ODonnell, Michael
    et al.
    Univ Calif Berkeley, CA 94720 USA.
    Nelson, Leif D.
    Univ Calif Berkeley, CA 94720 USA.
    Ackermann, Evi
    Univ Bern, Switzerland.
    Aczel, Balazs
    Eotvos Lorand Univ, Hungary.
    Akhtar, Athfah
    Birmingham City Univ, England.
    Aldrovandi, Silvio
    Birmingham City Univ, England.
    Alshaif, Nasseem
    Calif State Univ Bakersfield, CA USA.
    Andringa, Ronald
    Florida State Univ, FL 32306 USA.
    Aveyard, Mark
    Amer Univ Sharjah, U Arab Emirates.
    Babincak, Peter
    Univ Presov, Slovakia.
    Balatekin, Nursena
    Uskudar Univ, Turkey.
    Baldwin, Scott A.
    Brigham Young Univ, UT 84602 USA.
    Banik, Gabriel
    Univ Presov, Slovakia.
    Baskin, Ernest
    St Josephs Univ, PA 19131 USA.
    Bell, Raoul
    Witten Herdecke Univ, Germany.
    Bialobrzeska, Olga
    SWPS Univ Social Sci and Humanities, Poland.
    Birt, Angie R.
    Mt St Vincent Univ, Canada.
    Boot, Walter R.
    Florida State Univ, FL 32306 USA.
    Braithwaite, Scott R.
    Brigham Young Univ, UT 84602 USA.
    Briggs, Jessie C.
    Temple Univ, PA 19122 USA.
    Buchner, Axel
    Witten Herdecke Univ, Germany.
    Budd, Desiree
    Univ Wisconsin Stout, WI USA.
    Budzik, Kathryn
    Ashland Univ, OH USA.
    Bullens, Lottie
    Leiden Univ, Netherlands.
    Bulley, Richard L.
    Univ Queensland, Australia.
    Cannon, Peter R.
    Massey Univ, New Zealand.
    Cantarero, Katarzyna
    SWPS Univ Social Sci and Humanities, Poland.
    Cesario, Joseph
    Michigan State Univ, MI 48824 USA.
    Chambers, Stephanie
    East Tennessee State Univ, TN USA.
    Chartier, Christopher R.
    Ashland Univ, OH USA.
    Chekroun, Peggy
    Univ Paris Nanterre, France.
    Chong, Clara
    Singapore Management Univ, Singapore.
    Cleeremans, Axel
    Univ Libre Bruxelles, Belgium.
    Coary, Sean P.
    St Josephs Univ, PA 19131 USA.
    Coulthard, Jacob
    East Tennessee State Univ, TN USA.
    Cramwinckel, Florien M.
    Leiden Univ, Netherlands; Univ Utrecht, Netherlands.
    Denson, Thomas F.
    Univ New South Wales, Australia.
    Diaz-Lago, Marcos
    Univ Deusto, Spain.
    DiDonato, Theresa E.
    Loyola Univ Maryland, MD USA.
    Drummond, Aaron
    Massey Univ, New Zealand.
    Eberlen, Julia
    Univ Libre Bruxelles, Belgium.
    Ebersbach, Titus
    Univ Wuppertal, Germany.
    Edlund, John E.
    Rochester Inst Technol, NY 14623 USA.
    Finnigan, Katherine M.
    Univ Calif Davis, CA 95616 USA.
    Fisher, Justin
    Appalachian State Univ, NC 28608 USA.
    Frankowska, Natalia
    SWPS Univ Social Sci and Humanities, Poland.
    Garcia-Sanchez, Efrain
    Univ Granada, Spain.
    Golom, Frank D.
    Loyola Univ Maryland, MD USA.
    Graves, Andrew J.
    Appalachian State Univ, NC 28608 USA.
    Greenberg, Kevin
    Univ Utah, UT 84112 USA.
    Hanioti, Mando
    Univ Libre Bruxelles, Belgium.
    Hansen, Heather A.
    Calif State Univ Bakersfield, CA USA.
    Harder, Jenna A.
    Michigan State Univ, MI 48824 USA.
    Harrell, Erin R.
    Florida State Univ, FL 32306 USA.
    Hartanto, Andree
    Singapore Management Univ, Singapore.
    Inzlicht, Michael
    Univ Toronto, Canada.
    Johnson, David J.
    Michigan State Univ, MI 48824 USA.
    Karpinski, Andrew
    Temple Univ, PA 19122 USA.
    Keller, Victor N.
    Michigan State Univ, MI 48824 USA.
    Klein, Olivier
    Univ Libre Bruxelles, Belgium.
    Koppel, Lina
    Linköping University, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Center for Social and Affective Neuroscience. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences.
    Krahmer, Emiel
    Tilburg Univ, Netherlands.
    Lantian, Anthony
    Univ Paris Nanterre, France.
    Larson, Michael J.
    Brigham Young Univ, UT 84602 USA.
    Legal, Jean-Baptiste
    Univ Paris Nanterre, France.
    Lucas, Richard E.
    Michigan State Univ, MI 48824 USA.
    Lynott, Dermot
    Univ Lancaster, England.
    Magaldino, Corey M.
    Appalachian State Univ, NC 28608 USA.
    Massar, Karlijn
    Maastricht Univ, Netherlands.
    McBee, Matthew T.
    East Tennessee State Univ, TN USA.
    McLatchie, Neil
    Univ Lancaster, England.
    Melia, Nadhilla
    Singapore Management Univ, Singapore.
    Mensink, Michael C.
    Univ Wisconsin Stout, WI USA.
    Mieth, Laura
    Witten Herdecke Univ, Germany.
    Moore-Berg, Samantha
    Temple Univ, PA 19122 USA.
    Neeser, Geraldine
    Univ Bern, Switzerland.
    Newell, Ben R.
    Univ New South Wales, Australia.
    Noordewier, Marret K.
    Leiden Univ, Netherlands.
    Ozdogru, Asil Ali
    Uskudar Univ, Turkey.
    Pantazi, Myrto
    Univ Libre Bruxelles, Belgium.
    Parzuchowski, Michal
    SWPS Univ Social Sci and Humanities, Poland.
    Peters, Kim
    Univ Queensland, Australia.
    Philipp, Michael C.
    Massey Univ, New Zealand.
    Pollmann, Monique M. H.
    Tilburg Univ, Netherlands.
    Rentzelas, Panagiotis
    Birmingham City Univ, England.
    Rodriguez-Bailon, Rosa
    Univ Granada, Spain.
    Roeer, Jan Philipp
    Witten Herdecke Univ, Germany.
    Ropovik, Ivan
    Univ Presov, Slovakia.
    Roque, Nelson A.
    Florida State Univ, FL 32306 USA.
    Rueda, Carolina
    Univ Nacl Colombia, Colombia.
    Rutjens, Bastiaan T.
    Univ Amsterdam, Netherlands.
    Sackett, Katey
    Rochester Inst Technol, NY 14623 USA.
    Salamon, Janos
    Eotvos Lorand Univ, Hungary; Eotvos Lorand Univ, Hungary.
    Sanchez-Rodriguez, Angel
    Univ Granada, Spain.
    Saunders, Blair
    Univ Dundee, Scotland.
    Schaafsma, Juliette
    Tilburg Univ, Netherlands.
    Schulte-Mecklenbeck, Michael
    Univ Bern, Switzerland; Max Planck Inst Human Dev, Germany.
    Shanks, David R.
    UCL, England.
    Sherman, Martin F.
    Loyola Univ Maryland, MD USA.
    Steele, Kenneth M.
    Appalachian State Univ, NC 28608 USA.
    Steffens, Niklas K.
    Univ Queensland, Australia.
    Sun, Jessie
    Univ Calif Davis, CA 95616 USA.
    Susa, Kyle J.
    Calif State Univ Bakersfield, CA USA.
    Szaszi, Barnabas
    Eotvos Lorand Univ, Hungary.
    Szollosi, Aba
    Univ New South Wales, Australia.
    Tamayo, Ricardo M.
    Univ Nacl Colombia, Colombia.
    Tinghög, Gustav
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Tong, Yuk-yue
    Singapore Management Univ, Singapore.
    Tweten, Carol
    Michigan State Univ, MI 48824 USA.
    Vadillo, Miguel A.
    Univ Autonoma Madrid, Spain.
    Valcarcel, Deisy
    Univ Nacl Colombia, Colombia.
    Van der Linden, Nicolas
    Univ Libre Bruxelles, Belgium.
    van Elk, Michiel
    Univ Amsterdam, Netherlands.
    van Harreveld, Frenk
    Univ Amsterdam, Netherlands.
    Västfjäll, Daniel
    Linköping University, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Psychology. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Vazire, Simine
    Univ Calif Davis, CA 95616 USA.
    Verduyn, Philippe
    Maastricht Univ, Netherlands.
    Williams, Matt N.
    Massey Univ, New Zealand.
    Willis, Guillermo B.
    Univ Granada, Spain.
    Wood, Sarah E.
    Univ Wisconsin Stout, WI USA.
    Yang, Chunliang
    UCL, England.
    Zerhouni, Oulmann
    Univ Paris Nanterre, France.
    Zheng, Robert
    Univ Utah, UT 84112 USA.
    Zrubka, Mark
    Eotvos Lorand Univ, Hungary.
    Registered Replication Report: Dijksterhuis and van Knippenberg (1998)2018In: Perspectives on Psychological Science, ISSN 1745-6916, E-ISSN 1745-6924, Vol. 13, no 2, p. 268-294Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Dijksterhuis and van Knippenberg (1998) reported that participants primed with a category associated with intelligence (professor) subsequently performed 13% better on a trivia test than participants primed with a category associated with a lack of intelligence (soccer hooligans). In two unpublished replications of this study designed to verify the appropriate testing procedures, Dijksterhuis, van Knippenberg, and Holland observed a smaller difference between conditions (2%-3%) as well as a gender difference: Men showed the effect (9.3% and 7.6%), but women did not (0.3% and -0.3%). The procedure used in those replications served as the basis for this multilab Registered Replication Report. A total of 40 laboratories collected data for this project, and 23 of these laboratories met all inclusion criteria. Here we report the meta-analytic results for those 23 direct replications (total N = 4,493), which tested whether performance on a 30-item general-knowledge trivia task differed between these two priming conditions (results of supplementary analyses of the data from all 40 labs, N = 6,454, are also reported). We observed no overall difference in trivia performance between participants primed with the professor category and those primed with the hooligan category (0.14%) and no moderation by gender.

  • 50.
    Omar, Faisal
    et al.
    Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Health and Society. Linköping University, Faculty of Health Sciences.
    Tinghög, Gustav
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Health Care Analysis. Linköping University, Faculty of Health Sciences.
    Carlsson, Per
    Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Health Care Analysis. Linköping University, Faculty of Health Sciences.
    Omnell Persson, Marie
    Department of Nephrology and Transplantation, Skåne University Hospital (Malmö), Lund University, Malmö, Sweden.
    Welin, Stellan
    Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Health and Society. Linköping University, Faculty of Health Sciences.
    Priority setting in kidney transplantation: A qualitative study evaluating Swedish practices2013In: Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, ISSN 1403-4948, E-ISSN 1651-1905, Vol. 41, no 2, p. 206-215Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Background: Kidney transplantation is the established treatment of choice for end-stage renal disease; it increases survival, and quality of life, while being more cost effective than dialysis. It is, however, limited by the scarcity of kidneys. The aim of this paper is to investigate the fairness of the priority setting process underpinning Swedish kidney transplantation in reference to the Accountability for Reasonableness (A4R) framework. To achieve this, two significant stages of the process influencing access to transplantation are examined: assessment for transplant candidacy, and allocation of kidneys from deceased donors.

    Methods: Semi-structured interviews were the main source of data collection. Fifteen Interviewees included transplant surgeons, nephrologists, and transplant coordinators representing centers nationwide. Thematic analysis was used to analyze interviews, with the Accountability for Reasonableness framework serving as an analytical lens.

    Results: Decision-making both in the assessment and allocation stages are based on clusters of factors that belong to one of three levels: patient, professional, and the institutional levels. The factors appeal to values such as maximizing benefit, priority to the worst off, and equal treatment which are traded off.

    Discussion and Conclusions: The factors described in this paper and the values on which they rest on the most part satisfy the relevance condition of the accountability for reasonableness framework. There are however two potential sources for unequal treatment which we have identified: clinical judgment and institutional policies relating both to assessment and allocation. The appeals mechanisms are well developed and supported nationally which help to offset differences between centers. There is room for improvement in the areas of publicity and enforcement. The development of explicit national guidelines for assessing transplant candidacy and the creation of a central kidney allocation system would contribute to standardize practices across centers; and in the process help to better meet the conditions of fairness in reference to the A4R. The benefits of these policy proposals in the Swedish kidney transplant system merit serious consideration.

123 1 - 50 of 114
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf