View source for Crucial strategic factors regarding stakeholders in todays worldwide biosimilar industry

The authors assess levels and within-person changes in psychological well-being (i.e., depressive symptoms and life satisfaction) from before to during the COVID-19 pandemic for individuals in the United States, in general and by socioeconomic status (SES). The data is from 2 surveys of 1,143 adults from RAND Corporation's nationally representative American Life Panel, the first administered between April-June, 2019 and the second during the initial peak of the pandemic in the United States in April, 2020. Depressive symptoms during the pandemic were higher than population norms before the pandemic. Depressive symptoms increased from before to during COVID-19 and life satisfaction decreased. Individuals with higher education experienced a greater increase in depressive symptoms and a greater decrease in life satisfaction from before to during COVID-19 in comparison to those with lower education. Supplemental analysis illustrates that income had a curvilinear relationship with changes in well-being, such that individuals at the highest levels of income experienced a greater decrease in life satisfaction from before to during COVID-19 than individuals with lower levels of income. We draw on conservation of resources theory and the theory of fundamental social causes to examine four key mechanisms (perceived financial resources, perceived control, interpersonal resources, and COVID-19-related knowledge/news consumption) underlying the relationship between SES and well-being during COVID-19. These resources explained changes in well-being for the sample as a whole but did not provide insight into why individuals of higher education experienced a greater decline in well-being from before to during COVID-19. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).Lateralization of cognitive functions impacts many behaviours related to fitness and, in most species, varies greatly among individuals. Laboratory and field studies have suggested that within-species variation in lateralization is partly due to phenotypic plasticity. For example, in fish, prey that have experienced predation risk during early ontogeny develop highly lateralized phenotypes, and this lateralization often favours prey in evading predators. In contexts other than predation, plasticity of lateralization has also been reported for adult fish. Therefore, we asked whether adult fathead minnows, Pimephales promelas, exposed to high predation risk would also show plasticity linked to increase lateralization. We exposed minnows to conspecific alarm cues for up to 8 days to simulate predation risk and tested their lateralization with a standard detour test. The treatment affected lateralization but in an unexpected direction Individuals exposed to high predation risk showed lower lateralization scores compared to control fish. In addition, fish within groups exposed to risk reduced the variability in their directionality of lateralization; that is, they showed a similar turning preference in the detour task. Our study suggests that lateralization can vary in response to predation risk in adult fish. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).Previous research has shown that instrumental training can encourage the formation of binary associations between the representations of the elements present at the time of learning, that is, between the discriminative stimulus and the instrumental response (the S-R association), between the stimulus and outcome (the S-O association), and between the response and outcome (the R-O association). Studies with rats have used transfer procedures to explore the effects of discriminative extinction (i.e., extinction that is carried out in the presence of the discriminative stimuli) on these three binary associations. Thus, a reduction in the response rate of the extinguished response (R) can be detected in situations involving a different discriminative stimulus that was associated with the same outcome, and to unextinguished responses controlled by the discriminative stimulus (S) and associated with the outcome (O). These transfer effects suggest that R-O and S-O associations remain active after extinction in nonhuman animals. We carried out an experiment to explore these postextinction transfer effects in humans using a within-subject design. Contrary to nonhuman reports, the S-O association was affected by discriminative extinction, suggesting differences in the associative structure of instrumental conditioning in human and nonhuman animals that should be considered by those therapeutic strategies based in nonhuman animal research aimed to reduce unhealthy instrumental behaviours in human beings. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).Although a wealth of studies have evidenced successive negative contrast effects in instrumental or operant procedures, relatively few studies have determined if and how a sudden downshift in reward quality alters foraging behaviour. In light of research by ecologists and psychologists in the area of risk-sensitive foraging, this area would serve as an adequate framework to examine the effects of a sudden downshift in reward quality on foraging behaviour. Therefore, the purpose of the current experiment was to explore if and how a sudden downshift in reward quality altered risk-sensitive foraging in rats. [https://www.selleckchem.com/products/ceftaroline-fosamil.html see more] Subjects chose between a variable and fixed option that returned the same mean amount of sugar pellets, but one group of subjects (i.e., contrast group) were downshifted from 100% to 20% sugar pellets, whereas an unshifted control group received 20% sugar pellets throughout the study. Consistent with past risk-sensitive foraging research where reward quality was manipulated, subjects in the contrast group displayed significantly more risk-prone choices when reward quality was decreased from 100% to 20% sugar. However, the change in choice was inconsistent with contrast effects observed in prior contrast experiments. In addition to choice behaviour, other behavioural measures (e.g., rejected food, latency to choice) were significantly different between the unshifted control and contrast group and across conditions in the contrast group (e.g., latency to choice and rejected food significantly increased when reward quality changed from 100% to 20% sugar). These findings revealed a contrast effect and were similar to past contrast studies where reward quality was downshifted. Thus, when foragers experience a sudden downshift in reward quality, they may display significant behavioural changes and, in turn, display a bias for patches that yield a greater reward quality despite potentially lower payoffs. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).