Radar Rainfall Estimation in Morocco: Quality Control and Gauge Adjustment

This study focused on investigating the impact of gauge adjustment on the rainfall estimate from a Moroccan C-band weather radar located in Khouribga City. The radar reflectivity underwent a quality check before deployment to retrieve the rainfall amount. The process consisted of clutter identification and the correction of signal attenuation. Thereafter, the radar reflectivity was converted into rainfall depth over a period of 24 h. An assessment of the accuracy of the radar rainfall estimate over the study area showed an overall underestimation when compared to the rain gauges (bias = −6.4 mm and root mean square error [RMSE] = 8.9 mm). The adjustment model was applied, and a validation of the adjusted rainfall versus the rain gauges showed a positive impact (bias = −0.96 mm and RMSE = 6.7 mm). The case study conducted on December 16, 2016 revealed substantial improvements in the precipitation structure and intensity with reference to African Rainfall Climatology version 2 (ARC2) precipitations.

Early Career Researchers Want New Directions in Research Publishing. Recommendations from a Facilitated Discussion Between Early Career Researchers and Publishers

Aims. Early career researchers (ECRs) are crucial to the future of research. We set out to respond to pains and gains expressed by ECRs with a set of recommendations for research journal editors, publishers, and societies that publish. Methods. We recruited a panel of nine ECRs and collected their observations through a structured roundtable discussion, facilitated by Wiley colleagues and a professional cartoonist. The discussion was structured in three parts: “Finding your Research Idea”; “Doing Your Research”; and “Sharing your New Knowledge.” Findings. Our ECR panel shared insights which we collated under 12 headings: Time, research ethics, funding, impact bias, open research, access, information overload, getting published, writing and publishing tools, peer review, diversity, collaboration and competition. From these insights we derived a unique set of recommendations and progressive goals for journal editors-in-chief, publishers, and societies that publish. Conclusion. Today's ECRs will soon become established researchers. Tomorrow's ECRs will have new needs. This is perhaps our biggest challenge: To keep on learning from each subsequent generation of researchers, so we continue to deliver relevant services and value to those researchers

Reducing Discrimination: A Bias Versus Noise Perspective

Discrimination can occur when people fail to focus on outcome-relevant information and incorporate irrelevant demographic information into decision-making. The magnitude of discrimination then depends on 1) how many errors are made in judgment and 2) the degree to which errors disproportionately favor one group over another. As a result, discrimination can be reduced through two routes: reducing noise -- lessening the total number of errors but not changing the proportion of remaining errors that favor one group -- or reducing bias -- lessening the proportion of errors that favor one group but not changing the total number of errors made. Eight studies (N = 7,921) investigate how noise and bias rely on distinct psychological mechanisms and are influenced by different interventions. Interventions that removed demographic information not only eliminated bias, but also reduced noise (Studies 1a-1b). Interventions that either decreased (Studies 2a-2c) or increased (Study 3) the time available to evaluators impacted noise but not bias, as did interventions altering motivation to process outcome-relevant information (Study 4). Conversely, an intervention asking participants to avoid favoring a certain group impacted bias but not noise (Study 5). Finally, a novel intervention that both asked participants to avoid favoring a certain group and required them to take more time when making judgments impacted bias and noise simultaneously (Study 5). Efforts to reduce discrimination will be well-served by understanding how interventions impact bias, noise, or both.

When novel rituals impact intergroup bias: Evidence from economic games and neurophysiology

Long-established rituals in pre-existing cultural groups have been linked to the cultural evolution of group cooperation. Here we test the prediction that novel rituals – arbitrary hand and body gestures enacted in a stereotypical and repeated fashion – can impact intergroup bias in newly formed groups. In four studies, participants practiced novel rituals at home for one week (Experiments 1, 2, 4) or once in the lab (pre-registered Experiment 3), and were divided into minimal ingroups and outgroups. Our results offer mixed support for the hypothesis that novel rituals promote intergroup bias. A modest effect for daily repeated rituals but a null effect for rituals enacted only once suggests that novel rituals can inculcate bias, but only when certain features are present: rituals must be sufficiently elaborate and repeated to impact bias. Taken together, our results offer modest support for the influence of novel rituals on intergroup bias.