Securing Operational Capability for Exceptional Circumstances: How Do Professional First Responders Respond to the Unexpected?

Complexity and uncertainty are framing the modern world, whilst also affecting issues on security and sustainability. There is a need to prepare for known threats and identified risks, but also to improve the ability to cope in situations that are difficult to recognize or describe beforehand. What is at stake—both at the organizational and individual level—is the ability to make sense of uncertain and ambiguous situations. Analyzing two empirical cases, this study aims to shed light on the abilities of experts, who have acted in very challenging situations, in which deviating from established procedures and abandoning politeness have been necessary to respond effectively. The first case deals with a threat of serious violence faced by a police officer. The second case focuses on the actions of an executive fire officer during a rescue operation after an explosion at a shopping mall. This paper concludes by arguing that pre-established procedures require experts to reflect on their usability in exceptional situations as relying on them could also have detrimental effects.

Impact of Environmental Complexity and Stocking Density on Affective States of Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus Mykiss)

Affective states of animals can be assessed through judgement bias tests, evaluating responses to ambiguous situations. In this study, rainbow trout (n = 108) were housed in recirculating aquaculture systems under commercial conditions while trained at tank-level to discriminate between a positively reinforced chamber (feed) in one location and a negative chamber (positive punishment; chase by net for 1s) in the opposing location. Fish from successful tanks (2 out of 5 tanks) were then housed in treatment tanks of either high or low environmental complexity at either high (165 fish/m3) or low (69 fish/m3) stocking density. Trained fish were tested for latencies to approach three intermediate, ambiguous chambers. Fish housed in high-density tanks were faster to enter all chambers than those housed in low-density tanks (8.5s vs. 15.2s; P = 0.001), with faster entries into the positive (7.4s vs. 15.2s; P = 0.02) and near-negative chambers (10.2s vs. 17.4s; P = 0.006), suggesting that these fish were more optimistic to receive a feed reward. Tank complexity did not affect test outcomes. No differences between treatments were observed between body weight, length, and plasma cortisol. Overall, rainbow trout are capable of discriminating between cues during a judgement bias test and fish housed in high-density environments respond more optimistically in ambiguous situations compared to fish in low-density environments.

Testing an Integrated Theory: Distancing Norms in the Early Months of Covid-19

We draw on norms theory to develop hypotheses about norms regulating social distancing during the Covid-19 pandemic. We identify two theoretical approaches—the consequentialist and social cues approach—and argue that understanding norms will be enhanced by integrating these two approaches. We apply these general theoretical approaches to the Covid-19 pandemic to suggest concrete hypotheses regarding distancing norms. We test our hypotheses using two vignette experiments. We find that when the consequences of behavior are clear, both behavior consequences and social cues independently affect norms. But when the consequences of a behavior are ambiguous, behaviors and social cues interact to affect norms. Theoretically, our results provide the first empirical test of an integrated theory of norms, showing that in ambiguous situations an integrated approach produces more accurate predictions than either the behavior consequences or social cues approach alone. Substantively, our paper helps to explain Covid-19 distancing norms and variation in those norms across political orientation. Our findings have implications for understanding support for and compliance with public health directives.

Print Email The Godley–Tobin memorial lecture

John Maynard Keynes's (1936) concept of ‘animal spirits’ or ‘spontaneous optimism’ as a major driving force in business fluctuations was motivated in part by his and his contemporaries' observations of human reactions to ambiguous situations where probabilities couldn't be quantified. We can add that in such ambiguous situations there is evidence that people let contagious popular narratives and the emotions they generate influence their economic decisions. These popular narratives are typically remote from factual bases, just contagious. Macroeconomic dynamic models must have a theory that is related to models of the transmission of disease in epidemiology. We need to take the contagion of narratives seriously in economic modeling if we are to improve our understanding of animal spirits and their impact on the economy.

Accidental and Ambiguous Situations Reveal Specific Social Information Processing Biases and Deficits in Adolescents with Low Intellectual Level and Clinical Levels of Externalizing Behavior

Addressing aggression in youth requires understanding of the range of social problem situations that may lead to biased social information processing (SIP). The present study investigated situation-specificity of SIP and analyzed whether SIP deficits and biases are found in ambiguous as well as clearly accidental situations in adolescents with clinical levels of externalizing behavior or with low intellectual level, congruent with mild intellectual disability. Adolescents (N = 220, Mage = 15.21) completed a SIP test on a mobile app with six videos with ambiguous, hostile, and accidental social problems. Caretakers, teachers, and adolescents themselves reported on youth externalizing behavior problems. In accidental situations specifically, adolescents with low IQ scores more often attributed purposeful intent to perpetrators than peers with borderline or average IQ scores. In accidental situations, adolescents with clinical levels of externalizing behavior generated and selected more aggressive responses than nonclinical adolescents, regardless of their cognitive level. In line with previous literature, the ambiguous situations also brought out SIP differences between IQ groups. These results suggest that not only ambiguous situations should be considered informative for understanding SIP biases, but situations in which adolescents are clearly accidentally disadvantaged bring out SIP biases as well, that may lead to conflicts with others.

The Tendency to Feel Victimized in Interpersonal and Intergroup Relationships

This chapter discusses individual differences in the tendency to perceive interpersonal victimhood, and parallels to collective victimhood. Specifically, some people are more likely than others to perceive victimization on the interpersonal level, experience it more intensely, and incorporate these experiences into their identity. The tendency to perceive (interpersonal) victimhood consists of four dimensions: a need for recognition of suffering, perceived moral superiority, lack of empathy for others’ suffering, and rumination over negative feelings and thoughts related to experienced offenses. People who score higher on these dimensions show greater biases in their interpretation, memory, and attributions of interpersonal transgressions: They recall them more, perceive them as more severe, expect more to be harmed by others, and perceive more harm in ambiguous situations. They are also less willing to forgive transgressions. The authors compare this with parallel findings on intergroup relations in the context of collective violence, arguing that similar processes operate.

An Identity-Threat Perspective on Discrimination Attributions by Women of Color

The model of stigma-induced identity threat suggests that stigmatized individuals use situational cues (e.g., presence of an out-group member) to assess the identity threat potential of, or the risk of experiencing discrimination in, their environments. To date, however, this model has been tested in samples of participants with only one stigmatized identity. In three studies, we show that women of color attribute rejection to sexism more than racism when men are involved and to racism more than sexism when Whites are involved. Participants clearly attended to situational cues, despite predictions advanced in past research that women of color see all ambiguous situations in the same way: as involving primarily racism ( ethnic prominence) or as involving both racism and sexism ( double jeopardy). Study 3 further revealed that double-jeopardy-like attributions are more likely when rejections involve “double” out-group members, and single attributions are more likely when rejections involve “partial” out-group members.