Artificial intelligence systems absorb values from their training data. The trouble is that values differ across cultures. So an AI system trained on data from the entire internet won’t work equally well for people from different cultures.

But a new 91̽�� study suggests that AI could learn cultural values by observing human behavior. Researchers had AI systems observe people from two cultural groups playing a video game. On average, participants in one group behaved more altruistically. The AI assigned to each group learned that group’s degree of altruism, and was able to apply that value to a novel scenario beyond the one they were trained on.

The team Dec. 9 in PLOS One. 

“We shouldn’t hard code a universal set of values into AI systems, because many cultures have their own values,” said senior author , a 91̽��professor in the Paul G. Allen School of Computer Science & Engineering and co-director of the Center for Neurotechnology. “So we wanted to find out if an AI system can learn values the way children do, by observing people in their culture and absorbing their values.”

As inspiration, the team looked to showing that 19-month-old children raised in Latino and Asian households were more than those from other cultures. 

In the AI study, the team recruited 190 adults who identified as white and 110 who identified as Latino. Each group was assigned an AI agent, a system that can function autonomously. 

These agents were trained with a method called inverse reinforcement learning, or IRL. In the more common AI training method, reinforcement learning, or RL, a system is given a goal and gets rewarded based on how well it works toward that goal. In IRL, the AI system observes the behavior of a human or another AI agent, and infers the goal and underlying rewards. So a robot trained to play tennis with RL would be rewarded when it scores points, while a robot trained with IRL would watch professionals playing tennis and learn to emulate them by inferring goals such as scoring points.

This IRL approach more closely aligns with how humans develop. 

“Parents don’t simply train children to do a specific task over and over. Rather, they model or act in the general way they want their children to act. For example, they model sharing and caring towards others,” said co-author , a 91̽��professor of psychology and co-director of Institute for Learning & Brain Sciences (I-LABS). “Kids learn almost by osmosis how people act in a community or culture. The human values they learn are more ‘caught’ than ‘taught.’”

In the study, the AI agents were given the data of the participants playing a modified version of the video game Overcooked, in which players work to cook and deliver as much onion soup as possible. Players could see into another kitchen where a second player had to walk further to accomplish the same tasks, putting them at an obvious disadvantage. Participants didn’t know that the second player was a bot programmed to ask the human players for help. Participants could choose to give away onions to help the bot but at the personal cost of delivering less soup. 

Researchers found that overall the people in the Latino group chose to help more than those in the white group, and the AI agents learned the altruistic values of the group they were trained on. When playing the game, the agent trained on Latino data gave away more onions than the other agent. 

To see if the AI agents had learned a general set of values for altruism, the team conducted a second experiment. In a separate scenario, the agents had to decide whether to donate a portion of their money to someone in need. Again, the agents trained on Latino data from Overcooked were more altruistic. 

“We think that our proof-of-concept demonstrations would scale as you increase the amount and variety of culture-specific data you feed to the AI agent. Using such an approach, an AI company could potentially fine-tune their model to learn a specific culture’s values before deploying their AI system in that culture,” Rao said. 

Additional research is needed to know how this type of IRL training would perform in real-world scenarios, with more cultural groups, competing sets of values, and more complicated problems.

“Creating culturally attuned AI is an essential question for society,” Meltzoff said. “How do we create systems that can take the perspectives of others into account and become civic minded?”

, a 91̽��research engineer in the Allen School, and , a software engineer at Microsoft who completed this research as a 91̽��student, were co-lead authors. Other co-authors include , a scientist at the Allen Institute who completed this research as a 91̽��doctoral student; , an assistant professor at San Diego State University, who completed this research as a post-doctoral scholar at UW; and , a professor in the Allen School and director of the at UW. 

For more information, contact Rao at rao@cs.washington.edu.

Picture walking outside on a dark, cloudless evening. You look up to admire the stars — maybe even a planet, if you’re lucky — and a sense of wonder washes of you. New research from the 91̽�� shows this might be more than a memorable experience: It could ultimately spark scientific curiosity and influence life choices.

, research scientist the 91̽��Institute for Learning and Brain Sciences (I-LABS), and , co-director of I-LABS and professor of psychology, recently showing a link between the ability to see the stars unblocked by light pollution and an interest in astronomy.

91̽��News spoke with the authors about their study and its surprising implications for broadening access to science and education.

Where did the idea for this study come from?

Rodolfo Cortes Barragan: As psychologists, we know that changes to the environment can impact people’s behavior. Yet, the changes brought upon by light pollution — a hot topic in astronomy, biology and environmental science — have received little attention from the social sciences. We considered it important to examine how light pollution might affect the human mind, focusing on the consequences of light pollution for human emotions and scientific behavior.

Andrew Meltzoff: Astronomy often functions as a “gateway” to science as a whole. People, including young children, look up and are enchanted by seeing the starry night sky. They feel a sense of wonder which triggers curiosity about themselves and the universe. Many famous astronomers have remarked that they got their start in science based on childhood experiences of wondering about the night sky. We decided to study these reports scientifically.

How do you define the feeling of wonder about the universe?

RCB: The feeling of “wonder” is a particular conjunction of emotions. It involves awe and amazement. It involves curiosity — the desire to know more. It is joyful. It involves elation.

To examine wonder, we made use of a nationally representative survey conducted by the Pew Research Center of more than 35,000 U.S. residents. This survey included a question about peoples’ “wonder about the universe.” We combined these results with previously reported detailed physical measurements of light pollution. We found that U.S. populations that live under low light pollution report feeling more “wonder about the universe.” This was a specific relationship. Light pollution was not linked to other emotions that were assessed in the same Pew survey, but it was strongly connected to wonder.

Just as importantly, we found that “wonder about the universe” was directly related to peoples’ behavioral interest in astronomy. We used a wide array of measures of interest in astronomy, including behaviors like using Google to search for “astronomy,” signing up to have one’s name sent to Mars aboard the Perseverance rover, and even applying to become a NASA astronaut. In other words, the data showed us that, in locations in the U.S. where light pollution is low, feelings of wonder about the universe and interest in astronomy are high. Features of the physical environment are linked to people’s psychological experience as well as their actual behavior.

Can you elaborate on the idea raised in the paper that light pollution is an equity issue?

RCB: We all want all children, and adults, to have the equal opportunity for inspiration and for science. But what our results are suggesting is that people within the U.S., depending on where they live, do not have equitable access to the dark night sky, which often promotes an interest in science. If you can’t experience something, it is not as easy to become motivated by it.

AM: If a child grows up in an environment where they don’t see the stars, they’re not as likely to ask childlike questions about them: “Why do the stars twinkle?” or “How many are there up there?” It’s a powerful experience for a child to be able to see the Milky Way and the Big Dipper, but many children don’t have that opportunity anymore. Seeing the starry night sky may change kids’ behavior in a good way. For example, if a child can see the stars, they might go read up on astronomy or space exploration and begin to dream. Astronomy may indeed be a “gateway” science that draws children, both boys and girls, into curiosity-driven programs and social clubs.

What’s the big picture you want to convey about this study?

RCB: We hope that our study inspires more research along these lines, and that this work combining psychology and astronomy will trigger the “I wonder” reflex in other scientists, prompting interdisciplinary work across the arts and sciences.

AM: This study brings together two wonders that have inspired scientists and poets over the ages — the heavens above and our human actions on earth. One is studied by astronomers and the other by psychologists. Can we connect the two? A childlike question to be sure, but one that motivates us to try to dig deeper and find out more.

This study was funded by Stanford University Diversifying Academia, Recruiting Excellence (DARE) Doctoral Fellowship Program, the National Science Foundation’s Broadening Participation Postdoctoral Research Award and the Bezos Family Foundation.

For more information, Rodolfo Cortes Barragan at barragan@u.washington.edu and Andrew Meltzoff at meltzoff@uw.edu.

A parent interacting with a baby is a heart-warming and universal scene. The parent speaks in a high-pitched voice — known as “parentese” — as they respond positively to the baby’s babbling and gestures, commonly with eye contact and smiles.

These connections don’t just make for a touching sight. New research from the 91̽��’s Institute for Learning & Brain Sciences (I-LABS) shows they’re important for infant language growth, too.

In a study , researchers used a safe and noninvasive brain-imaging technique called magnetoencephalography, or MEG, to monitor infant brain activity during social and nonsocial interactions with the same adult. They found that when the adult talked and played socially with a 5-month-old baby, the baby’s brain activity particularly increased in regions responsible for attention — and the level of this type of activity predicted enhanced language development at later ages. This ‘social’ scenario was compared with a ‘nonsocial’ scenario in which the adult turned away from the baby to talk to another person. This interaction showed lower activity levels in the same brain areas.

“This is the first study to directly compare infant brain responses to adult-infant social interaction versus nonsocial interaction, and then follow up with the children until they reached the age of 2.5 to see how the early brain activation relates to the child’s future language abilities,” said lead author , research scientist at I-LABS.

The MEG brain-imaging technology allowed the baby to move and interact naturally with the adult, which enabled researchers to track the firing of neurons from multiple areas in the baby’s brain as the adult talked to, played with and smiled at the baby. They then monitored the infant’s brain activity a second time as the adult turned away and paid attention to someone else.

These actions naturally occur every day between adults and babies, and the study showed they have different measurable effects on a baby’s brain. Researchers found that increased neural activity in response to the social interaction at 5 months predicted enhanced language development at five later ages: 18, 21, 24, 27 and 30 months. The researchers tracked infants’ language development using a well-documented and validated survey that asks parents about words and sentences their infants say at home.

“The connection between early brain reactions and later language is consistent with scientists’ fascination with the early age period and opens up many new questions that we, and others, will be exploring,” said co-author , I-LABS co-director and a 91̽��professor of psychology.

Researchers chose 5-month-old babies for the study because that age is just before the “sensitive period” for speech-language learning, which begins at about 6 months. Once this period begins, it’s especially important for infants to observe adults because attention enhances learning.

Using parentese with infants represents an intuitive desire to connect, said , senior author and co-director of I-LABS.

“There’s an implicit understanding that language is about connection,” Kuhl said. “It’s about a communicative pathway between you and the other. This starts in infancy with the desire to make that communicative connection.”

The study’s results are particularly important for parents and early educators to understand, Kuhl said.

“We knew from previous work that social interaction is essential at 9-months of age for foreign-language learning, but the current study shows that social interaction plays a role much earlier,” Kuhl said. “The study shows that parents’ natural use of parentese, coupled with smiles, touch and their warm back-and-forth responses to the baby’s actions, have a real-world, measurable impact on the baby’s brain. We theorize that this parent behavior, which we call ‘the social ensemble,’ captures and holds infants’ attention and motivates them to learn at a critical time in development.”

Additional co-authors were , , , , and , all of I-LABS.  The study was funded by The Bezos Family Foundation, the Overdeck Foundation and grants from the National Institutes of Health.

For more information, contact Kuhl at pkkhul@uw.edu.

A study by researchers at the 91̽�� and Northwestern University found 84% of Black parents and 76% of white parents spoke to their 8- to 11-year-old children about the Black Lives Matter, or BLM, movement within a year of the .

However, the research revealed key differences in the language parents used to explain BLM. While 78% of Black parents affirmed Black lives and acknowledged systemic racism, only 35% of white parents reported similar messaging.

The study, , was prompted by the widespread calls in 2020 for national conversations on race that included children, as highlighted in a . The researchers wanted to learn what parents were saying to their children during this sociopolitical moment of upheaval.

“Parents are experiencing the stresses and ‘us versus them’ divisions in society, but what are they telling their kids about this?” said co-author , 91̽��professor of psychology and co-director of the .

Data for the study were collected via online survey between November 2020 and January 2021 from more than 700 socio-economically diverse parents of children aged 8-11. Study participants were evenly divided between Black and white parents. Respondents were asked whether they had spoken to their children about BLM, and, if so, were then asked what they had told their child. Open-ended question responses were then coded and categorized by the research team.

“While it is notable that many parents, including white parents, were talking with their children about Black Lives Matter, it is more important to consider what parents said,” said , lead author and professor of psychology at Northwestern University and principal director of the .

Rogers, who did her postdoctoral fellowship with Meltzoff at the 91̽��and later became a research assistant professor before being hired at Northwestern, said the responses showed not all “yes” responses were substantive, and importantly, the conversational approaches varied by race.

Black parents were more likely to acknowledge inequality — shown through responses like: “I talk with my son about the wrongful deaths of men and women of color at the hands of police” — and affirm Black lives with messages such as: “I try to remind him that he is important and worthy despite what the media tells us.”

White parents who gave substantive responses were more likely to communicate very general messages about equality without pointing to existing injustices, such as: “All lives matter no matter your skin color.”

The research team also noted a pattern of verbatim responses copied from the internet. This type of response was mostly used by white parents — 14% vs. 1% of Black parents — who had answered the survey with apparent credibility but could not or did not actually report their own thoughts when talking about BLM. In fact, 27% of white parents provided uncodeable responses, which included nonsensical comments or content copied and pasted word-for-word from Internet sources.

“Encouraging parents to talk about race, to break the silence, is necessary but insufficient,” Rogers said. “The upside is these data suggest that parents are listening to the societal conversation, and the concerted effort to engage parents and families in race talk did seem to influence the overall frequency of the reported conversations. However, the depth and substance of these conversations warrants further attention.”

Added Meltzoff: “Parents wonder when it’s appropriate to talk with their children about race and what’s the most helpful thing to say. We looked at the strategies taken by hundreds of parents across the country. Parents can teach us a lot about how to have conversations about race — not only with children but among ourselves.”

Other study co-authors were , associate professor at Tulane University; , assistant professor at Wake Forest University; Northwestern research assistants Chiara Dorsi and Finn Wintz; and Sarah Eisenmann, now a behavioral research coordinator at Ann and Robert H. Lurie Children’s Hospital of Chicago.

For more information, contact Meltzoff at meltzoff@uw.edu.

Adapted from a Northwestern University .

Andrew Meltzoff elected to National Academy of Education

, professor of psychology at the 91̽��and co-director of the , has been elected to the National Academy of Education. Members are selected based on outstanding scholarship or leadership related to education.

Members serve on expert study panels that address pressing issues in education. They also engage in the Academy’s professional development fellowship programs.

Meltzoff is a highly lauded researcher and internationally renowned expert on infant and child development. His research reaches beyond the bounds of psychology and investigates how role models and cultural stereotypes of different kinds impact child development, with implications for education.

“Adults have a drive to teach others, and young children have a drive to learn,” Meltzoff said. “Yet education in schools often misfires. Scientific advances in psychological and brain science should help us do a better job. Our children can’t wait, and our future literally depends on how well we feed, foster and embolden our children’s natural proclivity to learn. Social justice and equity issues can and should be addressed through education.”

Meltzoff’s election to the National Academy of Education adds to his long list of distinctions, including the 2020 William James Fellow Award from the Association for Psychological Science, given to honor a lifetime of significant intellectual contributions to the basic science of psychology.

Dean Edwina Uehara selected for 2023 lifetime achievement award

, dean of the 91̽�� , received the 2023 lifetime achievement award from the . The award recognizes her contributions to the social work profession in Washington state and across the country.

“Receiving NASW-Washington’s Lifetime Achievement Award is an incredible honor, and one that is doubly meaningful to me,” Uehara said. “First, because it recognizes the proudest professional title I hold as a ‘social worker,’ and second, because it’s an NASW-Washington state award. I am a Washingtonian though and through.”

Uehara’s career reflects a lifelong commitment to antiracism, civil rights and the development of culturally grounded mental health services. During her tenure, the School of Social Work became widely recognized as an innovative leader in advancing social and economic justice and enhancing quality of life through education, research and community engagement.

Citing her transformative leadership, the nomination letter spotlights how Uehara’s social work initiatives, including the , the , the and more. The letter praised Uehara as “a positive champion for the social work profession.”

Uehara will step down as dean on June 30 after 17 years of leadership and service, becoming the longest-serving dean in the School’s history. She will rejoin the faculty to pursue her research, teaching and leadership in the field of behavioral health.

Ed Kolodziej selected as finalist for Frontiers Planet Prize

, professor of at UW, represented the United States as national champion for the inaugural . The selection from 65 U.S. applicants elevated him into consideration for the international prize at the Frontiers Forum Live in Switzerland in April 2023. The prize competition recognizes scientists whose research contributes to the sustainable future of the planet.

Kolodziej led a team of researchers at 91̽��Tacoma, Washington State University-Puyallup, and elsewhere who discovered 6PPD-quinone, a highly toxic and previously unidentified compound that was killing coho salmon in urbanized Puget Sound streams. The discovery and the shockwave it sent through the tire industry, which uses the compound in all tire rubber, ultimately earned Kolodziej’s team the nomination.

“We believe that our work on understanding the contributions of tire rubber to environmental pollution is important,” said Kolodziej. “I look forward to the day when we have ‘salmon safe tires’ made from chemicals that are safe for both people and the environment.”

Kolodziej recently travelled to Switzerland for the announcement of the prize’s international awards, which come with $1.1 million to put toward future research. Kolodziej was not selected, but said he was grateful for the global interest in his research.

“It was an honor to represent the United States for the Frontier Planet Prize,” he said, “and I was thankful that our wonderful research team and many collaborators were recognized in this fashion.”

Children as young as age 6 develop ideas that girls are less interested than boys in computer science and engineering — stereotypes that can extend into the late teens and contribute to a gender gap in STEM college courses and related careers.

from the University of Houston and the 91̽��, published Nov. 22 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, explores the gender-based beliefs young children and teens hold about interest in STEM fields. The majority of children believe girls are less interested than boys in computer science and engineering, the study shows.

“Gender-interest stereotypes that STEM is for boys begins in grade school, and by the time they reach high school, many girls have made their decision not to pursue degrees in computer science and engineering because they feel they don’t belong,” said , an assistant professor of Psychological, Health and Learning Sciences at the University of Houston and the study’s lead author.

The PNAS study involved four different studies — a mix of surveys and designed experiments to capture the beliefs of a racially diverse sample of children and teens in grades 1 through 12. Researchers wanted to focus on interest, building on , to learn how gender-based stereotypes about who likes — not just who is “good” at — computer science and engineering can affect a child’s sense of belonging and willingness to participate. Such information can influence a young person’s motivation over the long term, researchers point out, and may deter them from trying an activity or taking a class.

As recently as 2019, national statistics reveal that women are underrepresented in some popular and lucrative STEM careers: statistics show that only about 25% of computer scientists and 15% of engineers were women.

In the first two studies, researchers surveyed more than 2,200 children and teens to gauge beliefs about computer science and engineering. The surveys used terms and phrases with which the students were familiar at school, such as “computer coding” for computer science or, for engineering, “designing and creating large structures such as roads and bridges.”

Researchers found that just over half (51%) of children believed girls are less interested than boys in computer science, and nearly two-thirds (63%) said girls are less interested in engineering. In comparison, 14% of children said girls are more interested than boys in computer science, and 9% said girls are more interested in engineering.

Subsequent lab studies provided a smaller sample of children two different activities from which to choose. The results demonstrated that girls were significantly less interested in a computer science activity when they were told boys were more interested in it than girls (35% of girls chose the activity), compared to one they were told boys and girls were equally interested in (65% of girls chose that activity).

While the surveys showed the pervasiveness of gender-based stereotypes around interest in computer science and engineering, the designed experiments demonstrated how stereotypes can affect a sense of belonging, which can influence motivation, co-author said.

“The large surveys told us that the kids had absorbed the cultural stereotype that girls are less interested in computer science and engineering. In the experiments we zeroed in on causal mechanisms and consequences of stereotypes,” said Meltzoff, a professor of psychology at the 91̽��and co-director of the Institute for Learning & Brain Sciences. “We discovered that labeling an activity in a stereotyped way influenced children’s interest in it and their willingness to take it home—the mere presence of the stereotype influenced kids in dramatic ways. This brought home to us the pernicious effect of stereotypes on children and teens”

And that’s important, added co-author , a 91̽��professor of psychology, because if fewer girls feel they belong, then fewer might pursue computer science or engineering through school and beyond. That can lead to gender disparities in STEM fields and even worsen the wage gap.

”Current gender disparities in computer science and engineering careers are troubling because these careers are lucrative, high status, and influence so many aspects of our daily lives.

The dearth of gender and racial diversity in these fields may be one of the reasons why many products and services have had negative consequences for women and people of color,” Cheryan said.

Teachers and parents can help counteract stereotypes by offering high-quality computer science and engineering activities early in elementary school — and encouraging girls’ participation, the authors note.

The study was funded by the National Science Foundation, the Institute of Education Sciences at the U.S. Department of Education, and the Bezos Family Foundation.

For more information, contact Meltzoff at meltzoff@uw.edu, Cheryan at scheryan@uw.edu, or Master at amaster@central.uh.edu.

This release includes material from S. Sara Tubbs at the University of Houston.

A daily routine, adequate sleep and limited screen time were associated with better mental health of young people during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic, according to a new study by researchers at Harvard University and the 91̽��.

The , published Aug. 11 in the journal PLOS ONE, surveyed more than 200 Seattle-area children and teens before the onset of the pandemic, during the initial lockdown phase in spring 2020, and six months later, when schools in the area were still operating remotely.

The spread of COVID-19, economic hardships and social isolation, especially during the first several months of the pandemic, fomented stress, anxiety and depression among children and teens alike, the study found. Now, even as school is expected to resume in person this fall, the study’s findings highlight the stressors of pandemic life, within or outside of a remote learning environment. Top stressors for kids were exposure to seemingly frightening media coverage of the coronavirus; the extensive, and passive, use of screens – whether on phones, TVs or computers; and disrupted routines and sleep patterns.

Mitigating those stressors, researchers found, generally involved targeted strategies: establishing structured routines for daily life, including sleep; limiting news consumption and passive screen time; and simply getting out in nature.

“The biggest thing that we hope parents take from the study is that while youth mental health has been negatively impacted by the pandemic, there are some simple steps that families can take that may have a positive impact,” said first author , a research associate at Harvard who previously was a postdoctoral researcher at the UW.

The study involved two groups of Seattle-area children ages 7 to 10 and teens ages 13 to 15, who were already participating in research on youth mental health and behavior prior to the pandemic. That ongoing research, for which 91̽��co-author started following families when the children were 3 years old, provided the team with a baseline with which to evaluate the effects of different phases of the pandemic. About half of participants were female, and about one-third were youth of color.

For this study, both young people and their parents were surveyed through web-based questionnaires, responding to questions that researchers developed specifically for the pandemic – a unique event that carried its own stressors. For example, researchers asked about issues related to the young person’s physical environment, burdens on family health and finances, and social and academic stresses. The answers also helped researchers learn whether and how young people were internalizing stress – developing anxiety or depression – or externalizing it, which would manifest in changes in behavior.

The COVID-19 pandemic presented some unique experiences for youth and their families, said Lengua, a 91̽��professor of psychology and director of the Center for Child and Family Well-Being.

“Research from past disasters, such as Hurricane Katrina, and also from studying stressful things that happen for families, such as divorce, have highlighted the factors that contribute to youth mental health in these contexts,” she said.  For example, unstable housing and economic situations, stressful life events, increases in family conflict or in parental mental health problems, contribute to children’s responses to major stress. Those were also true during the pandemic.

“But the pandemic included unique experiences, as well,” said Lengua. “Stay-home orders resulted in families having a lot of time at home without opportunities for youth to connect with peers and other adults for social support. While families reported appreciating the additional time together, for youth, this also meant feeling isolated and lonely. Having healthy daily routines and adequate sleep were particularly important in this context.”

Among the findings:

• The pandemic aggravated feelings of anxiety and depression in young people who had already experienced either or both
• Young people who had elevated stress levels during stay-at-home orders were also more likely to continue to experience stress six months later
• Teens were more likely to internalize their stresses than younger children
• “Passive” screen time, which researchers defined as scrolling or watching videos or shows, compared with the potentially more interactive screen use during remote instruction or chatting with friends, was associated with higher stress

Researchers also surveyed participants about inexpensive and easy methods of alleviating anxiety. Not all of the potential stress buffers, such as physical activity and volunteering in the community, showed demonstrable effects, but others, such as sleep, structured routines and time in nature, were related to better mental health.

Exposure to news of the pandemic affected young people differently. Researchers noted, however, the importance of having honest, age-appropriate conversations with children and teens about crisis events such as the pandemic, answering their questions, and limiting exposure to sensationalized coverage.

“There was striking individual variation in how children and teens responded to the pandemic. We wanted to get under the hood of this variation to try to understand the vulnerabilities and resilience of different children. We also wanted to provide helpful tips to parents and teens,” said co-author , a professor of psychology and co-director of the Institute for Learning & Brain Sciences (I-LABS) at the UW.

“There may be other pandemics in the future, and we think that some of the discoveries we made this time around can help parents and teens,” Meltzoff said. “There is no book about ‘how to cope with a worldwide pandemic,’ but science can provide helpful information that people can use now, even while we continue to gather more data.”

The study was funded by the Bezos Family Foundation, the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development and the National Institute of Mental Health.

Senior author on the study was Katie McLaughlin of Harvard and formerly of the UW. Additional co-authors were Makeda Mayes of I-LABS and Alexandra Rodman, Steven Kasparek and Malila Freeman of Harvard.

For more information, contact Lengua at liliana@uw.edu or Meltzoff at meltzoff@uw.edu.

This post contains material from Manisha Aggarwal-Schifellite at Harvard University.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, people who recognize the connections they share with others are more likely to wear a mask, follow health guidelines and help people, even at a potential cost to themselves, a new 91̽�� study shows.

Indeed, an identification with all humanity, as opposed to identification with a geographic area like a country or town, predicts whether someone will engage in “prosocial” behaviors particular to the pandemic, such as donating their own masks to a hospital or coming to the aid of a sick person.

The , published March 10 in PLOS ONE, is drawn from about 2,500 responses, from more than 80 countries, to an online, international study launched last April.

Researchers say the findings could have implications for public health messaging during the pandemic: Appealing to individuals’ deep sense of connectedness to others could, for example, encourage some people to get vaccinated, wear masks or follow other public health guidelines.

“We want to understand to what extent people feel connected with and identify with all humanity, and how that can be used to explain the individual differences in how people respond during the COVID-19 pandemic,” said author , a postdoctoral researcher at the 91̽��Institute for Learning & Brain Sciences, or I-LABS, who co-led the study with postdoctoral researcher at the Paul G. Allen School for Computer Science and Engineering.

In psychology, “identification with all humanity” is a belief that can be measured and utilized in predicting behavior or informing policy or decision-making. Last spring, as governments around the world were imposing pandemic restrictions, a multidisciplinary team of 91̽��researchers came together to study the implications of how people would respond to pandemic-related ethical dilemmas, and how those responses might be associated with various psychological beliefs.

Researchers designed an online study, providing different scenarios based in social psychology and game theory, for participants to consider. The team then made the study available in English and five other languages on the virtual lab , which co-author , an associate professor in the Allen School, created for conducting behavioral studies with people around the world.

The scenarios presented participants with situations that could arise during the pandemic and asked people to what extent they would:

• Follow the list of World Health Organization health guidelines (which mostly focused on social distancing and hygiene when the study was run between mid-April to mid-June)
• Donate masks of their family’s to a hospital short on masks
• Drive a person exhibiting obvious symptoms of COVID-19 to the hospital
• Go to a grocery store to buy food for a neighboring family
• Call an ambulance and wait with a sick person for it to arrive

In addition to demographic details and information about their local pandemic restrictions, such as stay-at-home orders, participants were asked questions to get at the psychology behind their responses: about their own felt identification with their local community, their nation and humanity, in general. For instance, participants were asked, “How much would you say you care (feel upset, want to help) when bad things happen to people all over the world?”

Researchers found that an identification with “all humanity” significantly predicted answers to the five scenarios, well above identifying with country or community, and after controlling for other variables such as gender, age or education level. Its effect was stronger than any other factor, said Barragan, and popped out as a highly significant predictor of people’s tendency to want to help others.

The authors noted that identifying with one’s country, in fact, came in a distant third, behind identification with humanity in general and one’s local community. Strong feelings toward one’s nation, nationalism, can lead to behavior and policies that favor some groups of people over others.

“There is variability in how people respond to the social aspects of the pandemic. Our research reveals that a crucial aspect of one’s world view – how much people feel connected to others they have never met – predicts people’s cooperation with public health measures and the altruism they feel toward others during the pandemic,” said co-author , who is co-director of I-LABS and holds the Job and Gertrud Tamaki Endowed Chair in psychology.

Since last spring, of course, much has changed. More than 2.5 million people worldwide have died of COVID-19, vaccines are being administered, and guidance from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, especially regarding masks, has evolved. If a new survey was launched today, Barragan said, the research group would like to include scenarios tuned to the current demands of the pandemic and the way it challenges us to care for others even while we maintain physical distancing.

While surveys, in general, can be prone to what’s known as self-serving bias — the participant answers in ways that they believe will make them “look good” — researchers say that’s not evident here. They point to the sizeable differences between responses that identify with all humanity, and those that identify with community or country, and note there would be little reason for participants to deliberately emphasize one and not the others.

The project is part of a larger multidisciplinary effort by this same 91̽��research team to bring together computer scientists and psychologists interested in decision-making in different cultural contexts, which could inform our understanding of human and machine learning.

An eventual aim of the study is to use tools from artificial intelligence research and online interactions with humans around the world to understand how one’s culture influences social and moral decision-making.

“This project is a wonderful example of how the tools of computer science can be combined with psychological science to understand human moral behaviors, revealing new information for the public good,” said co-author , the Hwang Endowed Professor of Computer Science and Engineering at the UW.

For COVID-19 and future humanitarian crises, the ethical dilemmas presented in the study can offer insight into what propels people to help, which can, in turn, inform policy and outreach.

“While it is true that many people don’t seem to be exhibiting helpful behaviors during this pandemic, what our study shows is that there are specific characteristics that predict who is especially likely to engage in such behavior,” Barragan said. “Future work could help people to feel a stronger connection to others, and this could promote more helpful behavior during pandemics.”

Additional co-authors were Koosha Khalvati, a doctoral student in the Allen School and Rechele Brooks, a research scientist with I-LABS.

The study was funded by the UW, the Templeton World Charity Foundation and the National Science Foundation.

For more information, contact Barragan at barragan@uw.edu or Meltzoff at meltzoff@uw.edu.

Meanwhile, you’ve read news stories highlighting the urgent PPE needs of your local hospital.

Do you donate some of your masks to the hospital? All of them? None?

Such is a moral dilemma under COVID-19, and one posed by a new international study led by the 91̽��. The five- to seven-minute, anonymous is designed to gauge the perception of ethical situations as the pandemic evolves around the world. Respondents take the survey, add basic demographic details, as well as information about current restrictions in place in their community, and learn at the end how their answers compare to others.

“People are making important decisions, big and small, in this time of COVID-19. Many find themselves facing moral dilemmas about ‘what’s the right thing to do’ in this situation,” said , a 91̽��psychology professor and co-director of the Institute for Learning & Brain Sciences. “This helps us learn about similarities and differences in the opinions and feelings among people as we all cope with this unique event.”

There are no right or wrong answers, researchers say, because the way each person responds may reflect the norms of where they live.

Ultimately, the research aims to help inform the ways artificial intelligence can become more attuned to cultural variations in how people think about decisions in health care settings, said , a professor in the UW’s Paul G. Allen School of Computer Science & Engineering and a co-director of the ,

“There is an urgent need to answer this question given the growing use of AI in medical contexts,” Rao said. Human moral values likely vary from one culture to another, so “AI systems need to ‘learn’ culture-specific moral values by interacting with humans, similar to how children learn their moral values.”

The scenarios in the survey are based on classic dilemmas posed in ethics, social psychology and game theory, Rao said. In two situations, the respondent is asked to imagine themselves as a doctor and to make a potentially life-altering choice. In other scenarios, the respondent is a passer-by or a neighbor presented with a not-so-simple opportunity to help.

The survey is available on the virtual lab , which , an associate professor in the Allen School and co-leader of the study with Meltzoff and Rao, created for conducting behavioral studies with people around the world. So far the moral dilemmas survey has been translated into five languages, including Spanish, German and Farsi (with more to come), and participants have come from about 70 countries. Researchers expect trends in responses to reflect geography and culture, Reinecke said.

Researchers expect some differences among age groups, as well: The survey is aimed at people across a wide range of ages. LabintheWild doesn’t usually exclude anyone, Reinecke added, but the difficult nature of the pandemic, and the scenarios presented in the survey, prompted researchers to design it to be of interest to participants from 14 years of age to adults well past retirement. The researchers wanted to design the questions to be interesting to a broad set of participants, because the pandemic affects everyone in society.

“We hope to look at responses according to the country of the participant and their age in order to learn how people are thinking about this once-in-a-lifetime event,” said Reinecke. “This will help us be better prepared if this comes around again. And one feature of the work that people find fun is that we have a chart at the end where people can compare their answers to those given by others around the world. Most people find this fascinating and informative.”

The study is funded by the UW, the Templeton World Charity Foundation and the National Science Foundation.

For more information, contact Reinecke at reinecke@cs.washington.edu, Rao at rao@cs.washington.edu or Meltzoff at meltzoff@uw.edu.

Andrew Meltzoff honored by the Association for Psychological Science

, 91̽��professor of psychology and co-director of the UW-based Institute for Learning & Brain Sciences, has been recognized by the Association for Psychological Science with a for 2020.

Meltzoff was one of four this year to receive the , which is given to members of the association, or APS, to honor “their lifetime of significant intellectual contributions to the basic science of psychology.”

The association praised Meltzoff, saying his “landmark studies in infant development helped reconfigure our understanding of preverbal cognition.

“Meltzoff demonstrated imitation in early infancy and proposed it as a powerful social learning mechanism by which infants begin to acquire the behaviors, skills, and norms of their culture. Through a set of classic studies, Meltzoff made key discoveries concerning the nature and functions of imitation in childhood.”

Meltzoff is the Job and Gertrud Tamaki Endowed Chair in psychology. Other recipients of the award this year are from Stanford University, University College London and the University of Michigan.

The award, the highest the association gives for contributions to the science of psychology, is named for American psychologist and philosopher (1842-1910).

***

Washington Sea Grant’s Crab Team wins SeaDoc Society’s 2020 Salish Sea Award

The ‘s detection and study of the dangerously invasive European green crab has brought it the from the University of California, Davis-based .

The society, a program of the UC Davis, awards its Salish Sea Science Prize every two years to recognize scientists “whose work results in the improved health of fish and wildlife populations in the Salish Sea.” The award was announced on Earth Day, April 22.

The is an invasive species affecting ecosystems worldwide, damaging shellfish harvests and other native species and habitats. In the Pacific Northwest, it could harm Dungeness crab populations and eelgrass habitats.

Thanks to the WSG Crab Team, “major scientifically based efforts are being made to stop its spread before it starts,” the SeaDoc Society wrote. The Salish Sea Prize comes with a no-strings $2,000 cash award.

The WSG Crab Team, which is housed in the and supported through the Washington State Department of Fish & Wildlife, created a volunteer-based early detection and monitoring program for the European green crab that includes a map of “at-risk” sites, allowing prioritized monitoring of susceptible estuaries and lagoons. The team also provides technical expertise to government and tribal resource managers and information to the public.

Jeff Adams is project lead for the and Emily Grason is program manager. P. Sean MacDonald, a College of Environment faculty member, is co-principal investigator and Kate Litle is assistant director for programs at Washington Sea Grant.

Grason called the European green crab “probably the most notorious and damaging marine invasive on the planet.”

She added: “It’s unfortunately not just on our doorstep here in the Salish Sea, but it’s wandered into our foyer as well. Our goal is to keep it from overstaying its welcome.”

Read more on the SeaDoc Society . For more information, contact Grason at egrason@uw.edu

***

National honors for College of Education researchers

Several faculty and students with the have received honors for 2020 from the .

, assistant professor, received Outstanding Dissertation awards in two categories and honorable mention in a third for her 2019 dissertation, “.” Listen to a with Washington.

Assistant professor , who studies teaching and learning writing in diverse classroom contexts, received an Early Career Award in the language and social processes category. Listen to a with Machado discussing her work.

Associate professor , a researcher with the , received an Outstanding Contribution to the Field Award in the category of education and sport. Hoffman wrote the recent book “.”

Other awards included an Out-of-School Time Emerging Scholar award for doctoral student ; and Miller and fellow doctoral student being accepted into the , co-sponsored by the association.

The association, called the AERA for short, canceled its April annual meeting, for the first time since World War II, due to the pandemic.

Read more about the honors and recipients on the college .