Robert Böhm

@robertboehm.bsky.social

3.5K followers 1.7K following 130 posts

Behavioral scientist studying judgment and decision making in response to societal challenges; robertboehm.info; Professor @univie.ac.at & @uniinnsbruck.bsky.social; Director https://whocc-sabrar.univie.ac.at; Co-director https://health.univie.ac.at/en/ .. more

Videos

Political science 23%

Sociology 23%

Posts Replies Media Videos

Robert Böhm @robertboehm.bsky.social · 3d

BTW, we explicitly mention the potential risks you refer to in the discussion section.

Robert Böhm @robertboehm.bsky.social · 3d

Open AI‘s GPT 4o

Robert Böhm @robertboehm.bsky.social · 4d

No, we use a standard llm but feed it with information for the user interactions. So, we cannot exclude certain bias, but haven’t observed it in our study.

Robert Böhm @robertboehm.bsky.social · 4d

Our AI communication is embedded in a gamified set-up via avatars speaking to users. We prompted it with specific evidence-based information, so the risk of misinformation spreading is very low.

Robert Böhm @robertboehm.bsky.social · 4d

We hope that the findings will help to improve and tailor climate-related communication for the public. Thanks for the financial support @undp.org & Tryg Fonden (5/5)

Robert Böhm @robertboehm.bsky.social · 4d

💡 Takeaway: One-size-fits-all climate communication doesn’t work. AI isn’t a magic bullet, but it can help reach people who would otherwise disengage from climate information altogether. If we want broader impact, we need smarter, audience-sensitive communication strategies. (4/5)

Robert Böhm @robertboehm.bsky.social · 4d

📊 Findings: Both communication formats can promote behavioral intentions and engagement. However, people who are less curious and less concerned about climate change are more likely to engage when information is delivered through interactive, AI-based formats (e.g., smartphone apps). (3/5)

Robert Böhm @robertboehm.bsky.social · 4d

🔍Aim: Across two preregistered studies, we examined how different communication formats—relying either on information-based or experience-based communication—affect climate-friendly behavior and engagement with climate information. (2/5)

Robert Böhm @robertboehm.bsky.social · 4d

🎄 New paper in the Journal of Environmental Psychology (early Christmas gift!) 🎄
"Engaging the unengaged: Differential effects of AI-driven climate communication across audiences"
together with Adéla Plechatá and Guido Makransky.
doi.org/10.1016/j.je... (1/5) 🧵👇

Reposted by Robert Böhm, Brady T. West, Brendan Nyhan , and 43 more Robert Böhm, Brady T. West, Brendan Nyhan, Gordon Hodson, Carl T. Bergstrom, Richard Price, Steven Van de Walle, Mary Feeney, Jamie Morgan, Ian Hall, Fabián Muniesa, Jason Reifler, Kelly Smith, Ingo Rohlfing, Ian Hussey, James Grimmelmann, Smith, Rebecca Tushnet, David R. Miller, Patrick S. Forscher, Michelle L. Mazurek, Margot C. Finn, Michael D. McDonald, Sebastian Karcher, Martin Kreidl, Maria Abreu, Eric Hehman, Zen Faulkes, Joanna Tai, Madeleine Pownall, Damian Trilling, David Murakami Wood, Sofia Stathi, Johannes Breuer, Woodrow Hartzog, Greg Linden, Jack Stilgoe, Richard M. Carpiano, Aleksandra Urman, Juan Ramón, Gemma C. Sharp, Terry Gaasterland, Maksym Polyakov, Jake Anders, Jeannette Sutton, Béatrice Cointe

Sabrina Norwood @sabrinanorwood.bsky.social · 10d

Did you know that from tomorrow, Qualtrics is offering synthetic panels (AI-generated participants)?

Follow me down a rabbit hole I'm calling "doing science is tough and I'm so busy, can't we just make up participants?"

Text reads: About synthetic panels
Recruiting the right participants for a study can be difficult. You may not get the exact demographics you need, and the shorter the deadline, the less sure you can be that everyone will answer on time. One possible solution can be to use synthetic panels.

Synthetic panels are powered by a first party proprietary AI model developed here at Qualtrics. Our synthetic panel is trained on thousands of responses from a variety of demographic backgrounds in order to more accurately predict how certain populations would respond to a survey.

Our synthetic panel is based on the United States General Population, and is only available in English. This panel comes with ready-made quotas and target breakouts in order to represent your chosen population and make it easy to launch your survey right away.

Text reads:
Discussion
The current study aimed to conduct a meta-analysis of the TPB when applied to health behaviours which addressed the limitations of previous reviews by including only prospective tests of behaviour, applying RE meta-analytic procedures, correcting correlations for sampling and measurement error, and hierarchically analysing the effect of behaviour type and sample and methodological moderators. Some 237 tests were identified which examined relations amongst model components. Overall the analysis indicated that the TPB could explain 19.3% of the variance in behaviour and 44.3% of the variance in intention across studies. This level of prediction of behaviour is slightly lower than that of previous meta-analytic reviews which have found between 27% (Armitage & Conner, 2001; Hagger et al., 2002) and 36% (Trafimow et al., 2002)
of the variance in behaviour to be explained by intention and PBC.

Robert Böhm @robertboehm.bsky.social · 15d

Ich sehe das anders. Anwendungsnahe Forschung inkl. Feldforschung ist sehr populär in der Ökonomie. Und sie machen es oftmals besser als (viele) Psycholog*innen: gute kausale Identifikationsstrategien + formale Prozesstheorien. Wir müssen uns methodisch weiterentwickeln um hier dran zu bleiben.

Reposted by Lisa W. Fazio, David G. Rand, Robert Böhm , and 4 more Lisa W. Fazio, David G. Rand, Robert Böhm, Hugo Mercier, Jon Green, Jae-Young Son, Roman Senninger

David Lazer @davidlazer.bsky.social · 17d

Paper out today in @nathumbehav.nature.com:

1) those groups (women, African Americans, lower SES, rural) that are underrepresented in science have been less trusting of science.

2) If you improve representation in science, you improve trust among those groups.

www.nature.com/articles/s41...

Representation in science and trust in scientists in the USA - Nature Human Behaviour

Druckman et al. document gaps in trust in scientists in the USA. People from groups less represented among scientists (for example, women and those with lower economic status) are less trusting. Incre...

www.nature.com

Robert Böhm @robertboehm.bsky.social · 25d

🚨NEW PUBLICATION🚨 together with @schildchristoph.bsky.social, @laulilleholt.bsky.social, and Ingo Zettler: "Testing the effectiveness and endorsement of collective punishment." Published in the European Journal of Personality, find it here: doi.org/10.1177/0890...

Robert Böhm @robertboehm.bsky.social · 25d

🚨NEW PAPER🚨 led by @qinyuxiao.bsky.social, with @simoncolumbus.bsky.social and me: "Self-serving intergroup aggression escalates and prevails over parochial cooperation." It's now published in Evolution and Human Behavior by @humbehevosoc.bsky.social. www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti...

Robert Böhm @robertboehm.bsky.social · 28d

Here is a summary report of the paper: csl.mpg.de/892188/how-p... (7/7)

How Parochialism and Altruism Shape Our Conflict Behavior

Discover how a novel instrument developed by researchers measures altruism and parochialism, shedding light on intergroup conflict behavior.

csl.mpg.de

Robert Böhm @robertboehm.bsky.social · 28d

Taken together, we present a new toolkit for measuring individual- and group-level social preferences, show that both are shaped by conflict experiences and perceptions, and demonstrate that they predict conflict engagement across diverse samples and group memberships. (6/7)

Robert Böhm @robertboehm.bsky.social · 28d

In a quasi-experimental Study 5 among US participants, we show that parochialism is elevated in high- relative to low-conflict group pairings, whereas altruism appears comparatively less depended on perceived conflict intensity. (5/7)

Robert Böhm @robertboehm.bsky.social · 28d

Study 4 employed a lab-in-the-field approach with members of the Nyangatom, a small-scale society in Ethiopia engaging in cross-border conflicts. We find that higher conflict experience is related to higher levels of altruism, particularly among participants with higher levels of parochialism. (4/7)

Robert Böhm @robertboehm.bsky.social · 28d

In Study 1, we validate our measurement toolkit, showing that altruism and parochialism are separate social preferences. In Studies 2-3, we find that individual-and group-level preferences independently predict participation in real-world conflict (football derby fans and political camps). (3/7)

Robert Böhm @robertboehm.bsky.social · 28d

Classic “parochial altruism” models assume two distinct preferences drive conflict participation:
𝗔𝗹𝘁𝗿𝘂𝗶𝘀𝗺: helping one’s ingroup at a personal cost,
𝗣𝗮𝗿𝗼𝗰𝗵𝗶𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘀𝗺: favoring ingroups over outgroups.
We develop a toolkit for measuring these individual- and group-level social preferences. (2/7)

Reposted by Hannes Rusch

Robert Böhm @robertboehm.bsky.social · 28d

🚨NEW PUBLICATION🚨 in @cp-iscience.bsky.social l together with @lukeglowacki.bsky.social, @hannesrusch.bsky.social and Isabel Thielmann: “Untangling altruism and parochialism in human intergroup conflict” doi.org/10.1016/j.is... (1/7)