The Strength of the Medial Olivocochlear Reflex in Chinchillas Is Associated With Delayed Response Performance in a Visual Discrimination Task With Vocalizations as Distractors

The ability to perceive the world is not merely a passive process but depends on sensorimotor loops and interactions that guide and actively bias our sensory systems. Understanding which and how cognitive processes participate in this active sensing is still an open question. In this context, the auditory system presents itself as an attractive model for this purpose as it features an efferent control network that projects from the cortex to subcortical nuclei and even to the sensory epithelium itself. This efferent system can regulate the cochlear amplifier sensitivity through medial olivocochlear (MOC) neurons located in the brainstem. The ability to suppress irrelevant sounds during selective attention to visual stimuli is one of the functions that have been attributed to this system. MOC neurons are also directly activated by sounds through a brainstem reflex circuit, a response linked to the ability to suppress auditory stimuli during visual attention. Human studies have suggested that MOC neurons are also recruited by other cognitive functions, such as working memory and predictability. The aim of this research was to explore whether cognitive processes related to delayed responses in a visual discrimination task were associated with MOC function. In this behavioral condition, chinchillas held their responses for more than 2.5 s after visual stimulus offset, with and without auditory distractors, and the accuracy of these responses was correlated with the magnitude of the MOC reflex. We found that the animals’ performance decreased in presence of auditory distractors and that the results observed in MOC reflex could predict this performance. The individual MOC strength correlated with behavioral performance during delayed responses with auditory distractors, but not without them. These results in chinchillas, suggest that MOC neurons are also recruited by other cognitive functions, such as working memory.

Forecast Hesitancy: Why are People Reluctant to Believe, Accept, or Respond to Various Weather, Water, and Climate Hazard-Related Forecasts?

Current discussions of the social phenomenon of “vaccine hesitancy” with regard to Covid-19 provide an opportunity to use hesitancy as a means to shift thinking about untimely and delayed responses to forecasts of hydrometeorological hazards. Hesitancy, that is, provides a paradigm through which such regrettably delayed responses to hydromet hazards might be better understood and effectively addressed. Without exaggeration, just about every hydromet event provides an example of how hesitancy hinders individual, community, and national government risk-reducing preventive and mitigative responses to forecasts of foreseeable, relatively near-term climate, water, or weather hazards. Reasons for such hesitancy (for vaccine and forecast use alike) include—among others—lack of trust in the science, lack of confidence in government, and persistent concern about the uncertainties that surround forecasting—both meteorological and public health. As such, a better understanding of the causes that lead to individual and group hesitancy can better inform hydromet forecasters and affected communities about ways in which beneficial actions in response to timely forecasts are often delayed. This better understanding will facilitate, where necessary, targeted interventions to enhance the societal value of forecasting by reducing this long-observed challenge of “forecast hesitancy.” First, this article focuses on incidents of “vaccine hesitancy” that, for various reasons, people around the world are even now experiencing with regard to several now-available, and confirmed efficacious, Covid-19 vaccines. Reports of such incidents of indecisiveness first increased dramatically over the first few months of 2021, despite the strong scientific confidence that vaccination would significantly lower personal risk of contracting as well as spreading the virus. After, the notion of forecast hesitancy with regard to hydrometeorological hazards is discussed.It’s not what you say, it’s what people hear.-Frank Luntz (2007)

Reported Affect Changes as a Function of Response Delay: Findings From a Pooled Dataset of Nine Experience Sampling Studies

Delayed responses are a common phenomenon in experience sampling studies. Yet no consensus exists on whether they should be excluded from the analysis or what the threshold for exclusion should be. Delayed responses could introduce bias, but previous investigations of systematic differences between delayed and timely responses have offered unclear results. To investigate differences as a function of delay, we conducted secondary analyses of nine paper and pencil based experience sampling studies including 1,528 individuals with different clinical statuses. In all participants, there were significant decreases in positive and increases in negative affect as a function of delay. In addition, delayed answers of participants without depression showed higher within-person variability and an initial strengthening in the relationships between contextual stress and affect. Participants with depression mostly showed the opposite pattern. Delayed responses seem qualitatively different from timely responses. Further research is needed to understand the mechanisms underlying these differences.

How do habitat amount and habitat fragmentation drive time-delayed responses of biodiversity to land-use change?

Land-use change is a root cause of the extinction crisis, but links between habitat change and biodiversity loss are not fully understood. While there is evidence that habitat loss is an important extinction driver, the relevance of habitat fragmentation remains debated. Moreover, while time delays of biodiversity responses to habitat transformation are well-documented, time-delayed effects have been ignored in the habitat loss versus fragmentation debate. Here, using a hierarchical Bayesian multi-species occupancy framework, we systematically tested for time-delayed responses of bird and mammal communities to habitat loss and to habitat fragmentation. We focused on the Argentine Chaco, where deforestation has been widespread recently. We used an extensive field dataset on birds and mammals, along with a time series of annual woodland maps from 1985 to 2016 covering recent and historical habitat transformations. Contemporary habitat amount explained bird and mammal occupancy better than past habitat amount. However, occupancy was affected more by the past rather than recent fragmentation, indicating a time-delayed response to fragmentation. Considering past landscape patterns is therefore crucial for understanding current biodiversity patterns. Not accounting for land-use history ignores the possibility of extinction debt and can thus obscure impacts of fragmentation, potentially explaining contrasting findings of habitat loss versus fragmentation studies.