#TheOnlyWayIsEthics - Ethics, digital data and research using social media

On Wednesday 20th May, I attended an ethics training event at the University of West England. The day had a varied programme, with talks focused on ethical guidelines and also considering implications in applied research.

The first speaker of the day was Kandy Woodfield, who really inspired me to think about ethics in a new way. Social media blurs the boundaries of ethical approval and causes a multitude of challenges. Although it could be argued that digital data in a public space, such as Twitter, is 'fair game', Kandy believes there is a moral obligation to gain informed consent (which I wholeheartedly agree with). As she stated 'Just because it's possible, it doesn't mean it's ethical'. The current framework for digital data collection is not adequate, drawing upon face-to-face methods with have an entirely different set of unique challenges. A new framework is needed to stop us from using 'an analogue ethics framework for a digital world'. Issues such as difficulties of anonymity, researcher transparency and credibility were also taken into consideration.

Next, Professor Richard McClatchey spoke about ethics in big data medical applications, including projects such as the MammoGRID; a network of mammogram scans from doctors all across the UK to compare and assist with diagnosis. To put this into perspective, you'd need a stack of CD's the size of the Eiffel Tower to store this information. This was applied to several different grids focusing on different health issues such as child paediatrics and neurological decline. Several data issues were raised including who owns the data and how to ensure patient anonymity. However, despite the clear ethical challenges, this research shows how useful digital data can be in our research.

Finally, two PhD students presented their ongoing work, which relies highly on social media and digital data. Josh Jarrett is looking into on-line gaming which involves data collection through forums such as Reddit and in-game observations. Jarrett highlighted the importance of transparency in this research but also immersing himself in the culture of the games he studied. Also, in environments such as these, conversation may easily turn hostile so it's important for the researcher to consider how to protect themselves in the process. The second PhD student, Milena Popova, is exploring fan-fiction and felt that she had 'more questions than answers' with regards to ethics. In my opinion, that's not necessarily a bad thing. It shows, as scientists, we are questioning and being thorough in every aspect of our research. Popova considered the anonymity of her participants as highly important and also stated 'I'm accountable for the community I'm researching', respecting the norms and the values of the online culture.

Overall, a fascinating day with vibrant presentations, sending me away with a new perspective on ethical approval in the digital age. I continue to view ethics, not as a boundary to research aims, but an integral part of the research process.
Please follow New Social Media, New Social Science? to get involved with digital ethics.

#TheOnlyWayIsEthics

Pints, cigarettes and corporation conflict - Pint of Science

For the second night of Pint of Science, I attended the Vice Night at the Greenbank in Bristol. These talks were all focused around vices in our behaviour such as smoking and, ironically given the location, alcohol. First up was David Troy, who I had the pleasure of already seeing speak at the BPS annual conference earlier in the month. Although the content was along the same theme, the presentation had a more relaxed air, bringing science to the public. After a witty opening ('rare to have an Irishman encouraging people to drink less alcohol'), Troy spoke about the David v.s, Goliath style struggle between the government and alcohol industry, with resistance from the later about policies that may reduce drinking behaviour. Glass shape was a method that was discussed, with interesting questions raised by fellow audience members about whether we believe pubs are deliberately using glass shape to make us consume more. A thoroughly interesting talk and well received by the audience also.

Next up was Meryem Grabski, a PHD student studying cigarettes and tobacco withdrawal. Current studies on quitting smoking use animal participants, making results hard to transfer to humans. Also, clinical trials tend to be too expensive and tobacco withdrawal itself is difficult to measure. Grabski's work is seeking a way to measure tobacco withdrawal successfully using human participants, in order to help us test and identity new treatment options. An eloquent and confident presentation. Interesting questions raised about how some people smoke for different reasons than tobacco addition, for example, they may like having something to do with their hands. Grabski agreed with this, saying there is not a one size fits all approach and we need to choose the right therapy for the right person.

During the break, we got to try on some pretty snazzy beer glasses and rate some faces on how attractive we found them! People who'd drank over 1 full drink were given red counters, and people who'd had less were given white counters (me again on the lime and sodas!). This experiment was a nice touch and a great way to encourage the audience to get involved in some science.

Last, but certainly not least on the programme was Professor Marcus Munafo, with an extremely engaging talk about choice and corporations, and how we might not be as in control of our behaviour as we think. Focusing on several vices, I learnt several new things about these products. Burning nicotine, for example, in cigarettes is designed to be as addictive as possible, being inhaled deeply into the lungs, whereas cigar smoke can penetrate through the cheeks. Even cigarettes branded as 'light' and therefore perceived as 'healthier' are smoking in a compensatory way that cancels out the lower tar content. Also, I never realised how much influence the tobacco industry had in research, funding projects that make their product appear more favourable. Munafo also tackled the issue of snacking, which didn't exist until it was introduced by the food industry in the 70's to increase the purchasing of their products. As a result of all this, there is an ongoing tensions between scientists and industry, with a clear conflict of interests. Corporations shape our governments, our research councils and even our science: important facts to remember when working in the behaviour change industry.


I thoroughly enjoyed both evenings I attended for Pint of Science and cannot wait to attend again next year!

Caffeine, erasing memories and an awkward happy birthday - Pint of Science

Last night, I attended the Pint of Science event at the Hole in the Wall pub in Bristol. Pint of Science is a worldwide, week long festival of accessible science presented in the comfort of pubs. So, with a lime and soda in hand (the curse of being a driver), the science began. The theme of this session was 'totally addicted'.

Dr. Chris Alford focused upon caffeine, beginning with the question 'is it a cure or is it a curse of modern living?' A group session on attempting to rate the amount of caffeine in certain food and drinks revealed that we don't seem to know much, which is bizarre when over 6 billion caffeine drinks are consumed worldwide everyday! In fact, caffeine is second only to oil in monetary value. Alford talked about how certain people may be predisposed to like coffee, whereas others may have a genetic polymorphism that causes those caffeine jitters. Both sides of the cure or curse argument were presented with a range of studies looking at sleep deprivation, caffeine withdrawal, sports performance, effect on health and the power of beliefs.
The good news is that the fatal dosage of coffee would be 30g of pure instant coffee (prior to boiling water), which is equal to about 2 and a half jars. A pretty difficult task to achieve! So we are all pretty safe using caffeine in a clever way and in moderation.

I would like to give a special mention to the compère for the evening (who's name I have forgotten sorry!). A young physicist PhD student who gelled the evening together with a vibrant energy and well-timed jest. He served up the audience a 'truth gateau', about how being a physicist is not as glamorous as it sounds. Cue a hilarious tale about being sung happy birthday by a room full of physicists. This was said to have made 30 seconds feel like 30 minutes, breaking the rules of time itself! He also hosted a delightful pub quiz all about the brain (did you know a leech has 32 brains?!).

The second speaker was Dr. Chris Bailey who took a neurological slant on how we may erase unwanted memories. This sounds like a page right out of a sci-fi novel, but Bailey explained the ins and outs of how we create a long-term memory through synaptic plasticity, and how interfering with this process may cause associations to fade away. The science behind this was well explained using a series of vignettes including the Pavlov's dogs experiment, Bailey's own childhood hatred of lavender and an example of application to post-traumatic stress disorder. Bailey's work focusing on looking for pharmaceuticals that target certain memory traces only, searching for a drug that may erase pleasurable associations with addictive stimuli. Propranolol has been identified as working on fear memories alone, and shows promise in erasing unwanted memories to do with phobias and, as mentioned previously, PTSD. However, work in addiction is still ongoing.

(Please note, this blog was fuelled by coffee! In my view, caffeine is a cure.)

The Food Revolution

If you've never heard of Jamie Oliver then where have you been?! Famous for his career as a television chef, this Essex boy also has a series of entrepreneurial ventures. All commendable achievements, but his more recent mission has been his 'Food Revolution', attempting to change worldwide health by changing the way we eat and teaching every child about food.

Jamie says 'We have blessed our children with a shorter lifespan' as a direct result of 'the landscape of food we've built". The leading cause of death in the USA is not homicide, which most Americans fear, but instead the biggest killer is diet-related disease, costing over $150 billion each year.

The way Jamie proposes we should tackle the current obesity climate actually draws on robust psychological theory, using techniques such as empowerment. The way he presented this in the above TED talk is a triangle of influence: home, school and the main street (including restaurants and supermarkets). The main focus is schools, which would have a knock on effect to home life. Teaching every child about food in schools, providing them with life skills such as cooking and bringing these skills out into the community could 'empower people everywhere to fight obesity'.

Note: Although the main street section of the triangle is harder to tackle, Jamie urges for governments to crack down on systems such as labelling, and put a food ambassador in every supermarket, who can guide customers towards healthier choices and suggest recipe ideas. Big brands need to make food education be at the heart of their businesses.

As health psychologists I feel as though it is crucial that we back this message. It is rare to find a credible celebrity endorsement in favour of good health, that has the potential to inspire and influence a generation. Psychologists need to work with Jamie Oliver to ensure that good theory influences these potential interventions.
Jamie launched his Food Revolution Day on the 15th May 2015.

I will be getting on board and signing The Food Revolution petition. Will you?

The Conversational Racetrack - A seminar by Elizabeth Stokoe

I was lucky enough to attend a seminar by Professor Elizabeth Stokoe, which was put on by my Department of Psychology in Bath as part of the Critical Research in Social Psychology group (CRISP). Her dynamic talk focused on the power of language, presented through a series of research vignettes. One particular research piece focused on how using the word 'give' instead of 'get' in a Christmas interaction with Santa, made children act more generously.

Another example focused on presenting to the GP with more than one health concern. If GPs asked 'do you have any other concerns to discuss in this visit?', only half of patients would express their second concern. Whereas if the GP asked 'do you have some other concerns to discuss during this visit?', 90% of patients would express their other concerns (Heritage et al. 2007). As a health psychology student, the impact of changing one word on behaviour is fascinating, and certainly indicates a need to assess current communication practices to glean what is currently working best.

Looking at current practice and using it to inform communication guidelines can be done using the Conversation Analytic Role Play Method (CARM). This process involves going through a real transcript (including audio and synchronised sub-titles), pausing the conversation at a crucial moment and allowing people to make suggestions about the next interaction in the conversation. Stokoe presented examples of this using GP surgery appointment phone calls and mediation services explaining what they can offer their clients. By analysing the scripts, it was obvious where the calls were either succeeding or failing, opening avenues for future training. Conversation was likened to a racetrack: having a set beginning and end point with various obstacles and encounters along the way. I urge you to watch the below video for a more in-depth and articulate explanation of this metaphor and the in's and out's of conversation analysis.

On the whole, this presentation inspired me to delve deeper into qualitative methods, and consider communication training from a completely different viewpoint: learning from what we know works, rather than what we theorise might.

Reference

Heritage, J., Robinson, J., D., Elliott, M. N., Beckett, M., & Wilkes, M. (2007). Reducing patients' unmet concerns in primary care: the difference one word can make. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 22(10), 1429-1433.

Day two: BPS Annual Conference review

Following on from my first post, here are a few of my personal highlights from day two of the BPS Annual Conference (note: I may review individual research papers from conference speakers in more detail at a later date).


Symposium - Environmental influences on food and alcohol related-behaviour

Rachel Pechey (University of Cambridge): Do supermarket end-of-ailse displays increase purchases of alcoholic drinks?
In supermarkets end of aisle displays are much sought after by manufacturers as, it is hypothesised, that ease of access may lead people to purchase products in these locations more frequently. Previous research on soap sales found that special displays are more effective at increasing buying behaviours than a cost price discount. I raised questions about how this information could translate to on-line purchasing, with more people now doing their weekly shop on the internet. Pechey also briefly discussed how these findings could be applied to increase healthy purchases, rather than limiting unhealthy ones.

David M. Troy (University of Bristol): Shaping alcohol behaviour change - it's in your hands.

Choice architecture interventions are currently in vogue amongst policy makers as they are low. Troy's paper considered the impact of volume perception on drinking behaviour and how modifying glass shape could make people drink less. People have difficulties in judging the mid-point of a curved glass in comparison to a straight glass, leading to quicker drinking. Troy highlights the challenges of feasibility, meeting resistance from landlords and customers about potential and attempted changes in glass shape. However, this research does show promise in a real-world setting. 

Amy L. Ahern (MRC Human Nutrition Research): The effect of covertly reducing food portion size at a single meal on daily energy intake and appetite control in overweight and obese adults.

'Portion distortion' is an issue that many customers face. Although smaller standard sizes of most products have been introduced in an attempt to reduce consumption of unhealthy foods, these are often launched alongside duo-packs. There's also considerable variation in recommended portion size between products, and the smaller sizes often stay the same price. As a health psychology student, even I get confused! The more food we are provided with, the more we tend to eat, which is not adjusted for at the next meal (even if the portion makes us physically fuller). Ahern's research found that reducing calories at one meal, did not lead to over eating at the next meal. However, the lab experiment controlled eating to certain times, meaning real-world application where food is readily available may yield different results. 

My main question in this area is, shouldn't the government have a duty of care to have food portion in a way that consumers can understand? Literally, food for thought

Milica Vasiljevic (University of Cambridge): Beware - the impact of colour of nutritional labels and injunctive norms on perceptions and choice of snack foods.

Currently, there is mixed evidence for perceptions of healthiness associated with traffic light labels. Vasiljevic's research is looking at injunctive norms, rather than descriptive norms, in influencing eating behaviour. Injunctive norms are your behaviours that other people approve of. This paper used 'smiling' or 'frowning' emoticons to represent the healthiness of the food. Emotions, unlike colour coding, do not have to be learnt, which meant in the results that participants of a lower socio-economic status understood the facial labelling more. This research fascinated me and was extremely well presented by Vasiljevic. The discussion opened up the idea of flipping around the emoticons for eating disorder patients, encouraging them to choose foods that would help them gain weight. However, brands may be reluctant to put a frowning emoticon on their products (raising my own questions about whether consumers 'trust' nutritional labelling at all), suggesting the way to move forward is through promotion of healthier alternatives, rather than an attack on junk foods. 

Keynote: Professor Richard Crisp - Adapting to diversity

"Challenging stereotypes leads to greater creativity!"

Research has found that there is a positive correlation between creativity and diversity. When we think about or encounter atypical members of a category we cannot rely on our existing knowledge and stereotypes. Instead our brain inhibits this existing knowledge in favour of forming new, creative ideas. However, our social brain likes to create typologies to simplify the complexity of human behaviour, leading to categorisation. Diversity, it appears, is antithetical to the social mind. The solution? Engaging in imagined scripts where the individual encounters diversity, led to an actual increase in diversity contact and subsequent creativity!

Crisp's research suggest that inhibition is a core mental muscle, meaning that research like this may have an application in the realm of health, bridging the intention-behaviour gap and implementation intentions. If imagined scripts lead to actual increases in behaviour, perhaps we should all be imaging living a healthier lifestyle! 

Overall, an inspirational ending to my time at the conference. 

An honourable mention has to go to Professor Cary Cooper, who spoke passionately about work-place stress and well-being, stating  “It’s not about apples on a desk, it’s treating people like human beings". 

Another honourable mention for Susan van Scoyoc presenting a keynote address at the trainee conference about making the most of the supervisory journey. Scoyoc highlighted the need for both supervisor and supervisee to learn and engage from the experience, to evoke the 'inner supervisor' and form a secure attachment akin to a loving, but firm parent.

Day one: BPS Annual Conference Review

Last week (May 5th-6th), I had the great pleasure of attending the BPS annual conference whose themes this year included culture and identity, disaster, trauma and crisis, the social brain and, one of my current areas of interest, behaviour change. As ever, the conference was an engaging mix of symposiums, workshops and keynotes on a wide variety of topics. Having attended two out of three days of the conference, I would like to give a mention to some of my personal highlights from the first day of the conference (note: I may review individual research papers from conference speakers in more detail at a later date).


Symposium - Cognitive and social influence on alcohol consumption and food intake: implications for behaviour change. 

Matt Field (University of Liverpool) On the whole, alcohol consumption is falling but regular drinks are consuming more than ever. Also, obesity has been termed as 'the new smoking'. Both these issues are causing great costs to the NHS. This symposium focused on policy and choice architecture interventions which show promise in these areas. Field was an engaging speaker, opening and chairing the symposium with ease.

Andrew Jones (University of Liverpool): Inhibition training on alcohol intake in problem drinkers Inhibition is the inability to stop, change or delay behaviours that are longer appropriate. Jones used the analogy of a traffic light turning red, which makes us stop. Using computer-based lab tasks to improve inhibitory control towards alcohol seems to show promise. This paper discussed the possibility of using general inhibitory training, limiting the exposure to alcohol related cues, attention bias and subsequent drinking. An interesting talk, with Jones responding well to questions regarding the methodology used and the possibility of applying the research in a more realistic environment.

Charlotte Hardman (University of Liverpool): Don’t look at chocolate: attentional bias modification This talk began by discussing the impact of the obesogenic environment, causing attentional bias towards unhealthy foods and leading to subsequent eating behaviours. Theoretical underpinning from incentive sensitisation theory could explain this process, says Hardman. However, it is difficult to modify attentional bias towards food as we are so deeply pre-disposed. Perhaps the route to take is to use this training to increase healthy habits rather than discourage unhealthy ones.

Eric Robinson (University of Liverpool): Perceived eating norms and energy intake: from lab to behaviour change
As humans are very social in nature, we use the behaviour of others to provide us with adaptive information. This can also be seen in social eating behaviour in animals and in children who observe the facial expressions of their fellow diners. Research suggests that people tend to consume more food when in larger group. Robinson's research showed that we are socially influenced even when we are eating alone, if we are made aware of a possible social norm.

Paul Christiansen: Controlling alcohol consumption: the role of beliefs
A video of a drunken Homer Simpson began this talk, with his good intentions of having only one drink or two to 'whet his whistle', ending in a naked dance around a maypole! As we are aware, controlling your alcohol consumption once you've started drinking is difficult, often called the alcohol priming effect, leading to impairments in inhibitory control. Previous research has used placebo drinks, atomised with a spray of vodka. However, if people BELIEVE they have had a drink, this has been shown to alter their actual behaviour, resulting the control being skewed. Placebo drinks have been shown to increase cravings and impair cognition. However, Christiansen may have found a simple solution through increasing ego depletion. Implicitly telling someone that they are in the top percentage of people for controlling their responses, actually increased their ability to show inhibitory control. Interestingly, explicit messages of control were not effective. An extremely fascinating topic, well presented and memorable. Definitely an area I shall be reading around further.

Symposium - Understanding the impact of technology on behaviours
Convenor: Benjamin R. Cowan (University College Dublin)

Anna L. Cox (University College London Interaction Centre): Goals, nudges and habits: designing digital behaviour change technologies
Technology has the ability to capture our attention, such as our constant checking of our phones in the absence of a message tone! Therefore, we should be able to use technology to create good habits. However, current apps use reminders and monitoring, which may not be sufficient to form a new habit. An evaluation of existing habit formation apps was disappointing, with most not utilising theory. Cox expressed a need for collaboration between psychologists and human computer interaction experts to reap the best benefits from health technology on behaviour. A sentiment I fully endorse, and well conveyed to the audience.

Oscar De Bruijn (Manchester Business School): The effect of media on grounding in task related computer mediated conversation
This talk began by showing how communication has evolved alongside new technology, with different styles being used for different platforms (for example email v.s. instant messaging). These different methods of communication have different costs, with email having a delayed response but IM being shorter and less detailed in content. Important factors to consider when designing interventions using technologically advanced delivery methods. Again, Bruijn highlighted that technology is not designed for people, but people merely adapt, suggesting a need for psychologists to be involved in the design of new technology.

Ducan Brumby (University College London Interaction Centre): Technology and behaviour: it's all about time
This talk focused on the trade-offs between technology and time. With the introduction of wearable technology, this minimises the time between intention and action, making the process more accessible as a whole. Also, Brumby explored how we interpret forcible phone calls as a costly interruption to our time, so possible changes in design are needed. An extremely interesting presentation, despite it not being my specific area of interest. Perhaps when designing health-based technology it is important to consider the perceived time 'cost' of engaging with these methods.

Jens Binder (Nottingham Trent University): Managing online network diversity: The complexities of social spheres
Social networking facilitates socialisation but appear to cause online tension claims Binder. Offline social spheres are easily controlled and have clearly defined social norms, whereas online spheres often ignore boundaries. Having a diverse social network predicts tension, but only online. Furthermore, research by Binder shows that social network diversity predicts lower trust but only in a Western context. A well structured and informative talk. I asked a question of Binder and Cox about the tension that social support via apps might cause, with individuals frequently posting information that others might find to be in conflict with their ideals and social norms. Cox claimed the solution to this is collaboration between psychologists and technology experts to understand and enable social spheres to be used to change behaviour in a theoretical manner.

-