It is well known that AI-based language technology—large language models, machine translation systems, multilingual dictionaries, and corpora—is currently limited to three percent of the world’s most widely spoken, financially and politically backed languages. In response, recent efforts have sought to address the “digital language divide” by extending the reach of large language models to “underserved languages.” We show how some of these efforts tend to produce flawed solutions that adhere to a hard-wired representational preference for certain languages, which we call (...) language modeling bias. Language modeling bias is a specific and under-studied form of linguistic bias were language technology by design favors certain languages, dialects, or sociolects with respect to others. We show that language modeling bias can result in systems that, while being precise regarding languages and cultures of dominant powers, are limited in the expression of socio-culturally relevant notions of other communities. We further argue that at the root of this problem lies a systematic tendency of technology developer communities to apply a simplistic understanding of diversity which does not do justice to the more profound differences that languages, and ultimately the communities that speak them, embody. Drawing on the concept of epistemic injustice, we point to the broader ethico-political implications and show how it can lead not only to a disregard for valuable aspects of diversity but also to an under-representation of the needs of marginalized language communities. Finally, we present an alternative socio-technical approach that is designed to tackle some of the analyzed problems. (shrink)

Positive and negative forms of social control are commonly used to regulate another person’s health-related behaviors, especially in couples. Social control efforts have been shown to result in desirable, but also undesirable effects on different outcomes. Little is known for which outcomes, when, and under which contextual conditions these different effects unfold in people’s everyday lives. Using the dual-effects model of health-related social control, we predicted that same-day and previous-day positive social control would result in desirable effects on target behavior, (...) and same-day positive control on affect. Same-day and previous-day negative control was assumed to result in undesirable effects on reactant responses, and same-day negative control on affect. Further, we explored whether it makes a difference if one or both partners intend to change their health behavior. Three daily diary studies addressed these questions for smoking, and physical activity. Receiving more positive control related to more desirable target behavior, and feeling better; more negative control was associated with more reactant responses and feeling worse. Social control unfolded its effects within 1 day, but hardly across days, indicating that control and its reactions to it are fast-acting processes in daily life. The pattern of results were the same for couples with one and both partners intending to change their behavior. Further, results replicated when using partner-reported provided control. Based on these results, social control cannot be unanimously recommended as a behavior change strategy in couples. Future studies should follow up on dyadic and temporal dynamics of social control in couples’ everyday lives in different contexts. (shrink)

BackgroundSocial support plays an important role for health outcomes. Support for those living with chronic conditions may be particularly important for their health, and even for their survival. The role of support for the survival of cancer patients after receiving an allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant is understudied. To better understand the link between survival and support, as well as different sources and functions of support, we conducted two studies in alloHCT patients. First, we examined whether social support is related to (...) survival. Second, we examined who provides which support and which specific support-related functions and tasks are fulfilled by lay caregivers and healthcare professionals.MethodsIn Study 1, we conducted a retrospective chart review of alloHCT patients and registered availability of a dedicated lay caregiver and survival. In Study 2, we prospectively followed patients after alloHCT from the same hospital, partly overlapping from Study 1, who shared their experiences of support from lay caregivers and healthcare providers in semi-structured in-depth interviews 3 to 6 months after their first hospital discharge.ResultsPatients with a dedicated caregiver had a higher probability of surviving to 100 days than patients without a caregiver, OR = 2.84, p = 0.042. Study 2 demonstrated the importance of post-transplant support due to patients’ emotional needs and complex self-care regimen. The role of lay caregivers extended to many areas of patients’ daily lives, including support for attending doctor’s appointments, managing medications and financial tasks, physical distancing, and maintaining strict dietary requirements. Healthcare providers mainly fulfilled medical needs and provided informational support, while lay caregivers were the main source of emotional and practical support.ConclusionThe findings highlight the importance of studying support from lay caregivers as well as healthcare providers, to better understand how they work together to support patients’ adherence to recommended self-care and survival. (shrink)

Das Novum Organum (1620), das zentrale Hauptwerk der berühmten Instauratio Magna (Große Erneuerung der Wissenschaften) Francis Bacons (1561-1626), markiert den radikalen Bruch der neuzeitlichen Wissenschaft mit den antiken und mittelalterlichen Traditionen des Denkens. Methodische "Forschung" sowie "Fortschritt" und soziale "Wohlfahrt" als Erkenntniszweck - das sind die Grundthemen, denen Bacon erstmals Bestimmtheit gab.

Das Novum Organum (1620), das zentrale Hauptwerk der berühmten Instauratio Magna (Große Erneuerung der Wissenschaften) Francis Bacons (1561-1626), markiert den radikalen Bruch der neuzeitlichen Wissenschaft mit den antiken und mittelalterlichen Traditionen des Denkens. Methodische "Forschung" sowie "Fortschritt" und soziale "Wohlfahrt" als Erkenntniszweck - das sind die Grundthemen, denen Bacon erstmals Bestimmtheit gab.