From the foundation of self-determination theory and existing literature on forms of power, we empirically explored relationships between followers’ perceptions of their leader’s use of various forms of power, followers’ self-reported motivational outlooks, and followers’ favorable work intentions. Using survey data collected from two studies of working professionals, we apply path analysis and hierarchical multiple regression to analyze variance among constructs of interest. We found that followers’ perceptions of hard power use by their leaders (i.e., reward, coercive, and legitimate power) (...) was often related to higher levels of sub-optimal motivation in followers (i.e., amotivation, external regulation, and introjected regulation). However, followers who perceived their leaders used soft power (i.e., expert, referent, and informational power) often experienced higher levels of optimal motivation (i.e., identified regulation and intrinsic motivation), but further investigation of soft power use is warranted. The quality of followers’ motivational outlooks was also related to intentions to perform favorably for their organizations. (shrink)

The Modern Dance of Death by Peyton Rous was originally delivered as the Linacre lecture for the year 1929 at the University of Cambridge. The purpose of the lecture was to discuss the manner in which humankind's relationship to physical ailments and the attendant risks of death had altered in the four hundred years since Thomas Linacre's time. As Rous saw it, 'From the moment that the body becomes a going concern it must fight for its integrity. Its Dance (...) with Death begins long before birth and never ceases throughout the lengthening period of what we call health. Everything coming in contact with it shapes its destiny.'. (shrink)

In this concise book based on his Arne Ryde Lectures in 2002, Young suggests a conceptual framework for studying strategic learning and highlights theoretical developments in the area. He discusses the interactive learning problem; reinforcement and regret; equilibrium; conditional no-regret learning; prediction, postdiction, and calibration; fictitious play and its variants; Bayesian learning; and hypothesis testing. Young's framework emphasizes the amount of information required to implement different types of learning rules, criteria for evaluating their performance, and alternative notions of equilibrium to (...) which they converge. He also stresses the limits of what can be achieved: for a given type of game and a given amount of information, there may exist no learning procedure that satisfies certain reasonable criteria of performance and convergence. In short, Young has provided a valuable primer that delineates what we know, what we would like to know, and the limits of what we can know, when we try to learn about a system that is composed of other learners. (shrink)

With the pressing shortage of human organs and recent breakthroughs in gene editing, xenotransplantation—using animal organs, tissues or cells for human transplants—offers new hope for patients on wait lists. The use of genome editing technologies to produce xenotransplants from pigs with reduced immunogenicity has recently brought renewed attention to the field while also raising a host of ethical dilemmas. These concerns include animal welfare, the risks of zoonotic diseases, the moral implications of crossing species boundaries and the potential inequities in (...) access to such treatments. In their article ‘Who shall go first? A multicriteria approach to patient selection for first clinical trials of cardiac xenotransplantation’,1 Kögel and colleagues propose an ethical framework for selecting patients in cardiac xenotransplantation trials. They argue that while significant advances have been made with xenotransplants in brain-dead humans, limited knowledge can be gained from procedures performed outside clinical trials. According to them, knowledge production should be prioritised, and terminally ill patients who are unlikely to survive would not contribute meaningfully to scientific understanding or benefit from the procedure. At the core of xenotransplantation ethics …. (shrink)

In their article, Romanis and Adkins delineate pregnancy loss and procreative loss to show that the former is possible without the latter, as in the case of artificial amnion and placenta technology.1 Here, we are interested in examining the reverse—procreative loss without pregnancy loss—to further tease apart these two types of loss. We discuss two cases: being forced to continue a pregnancy despite fetal demise due to abortion restrictions and choosing to selectively reduce a multifetal pregnancy. Our analysis buttresses the (...) authors’ conclusion: due to our fetal-centric conception of pregnancy, we are only able to value pregnancy instrumentally (ie, for the fetus), not intrinsically. Understanding pregnancy as an embodied state rather than a process that not only acknowledges the intrinsic value of pregnancy for pregnant people but also encourages society to intrinsically value pregnant people is important. In 2022, the Supreme Court of the United States removed the constitutional right to an abortion in Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization, shifting the responsibility of determining abortion regulations to individual US states.2 Due to the Dobbs decision, there …. (shrink)

This article concerns itself with the reception of Rous’ 1911 discovery of what later came to be known as the Rous Sarcoma Virus. Rous made his discovery at the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research which had been primarily established to conduct research into infectious diseases. Rous’ chance discovery of a chicken tumor led him to a series of conjectures about cancer causation and about whether cancer could have an extrinsic cause. Rous’ finding was received with some scepticism by the scientific (...) community that held that cancer was not infectious and favored explanations which located the origins of cancer in the inner mechanism of the cell. After 4 years of unsuccessful effort to isolate and further determine the virus Rous felt compelled to discontinue his work on cancer viruses. When 55 years later, the significance of Rous’s discovery was attested by the award of the Nobel Prize, it opened up debates about the issues of delayed recognition and scientific reputation. This article also considers why Rous’ hypothesis of a viral origin of cancer could not be incorporated into the existing body of knowledge about cancer before the 1950s. (shrink)

Contemporary oncological research is predominantly characterised by genetic explanations, a situation which may be briefly denoted as the oncogene paradigm. This essay discusses why the new paradigm was perceived so attractive that it could take over the whole field of oncology within a time-span of less than two decades. It is argued that the revolutionary character of the oncogene paradigm stems from the fact that it transcends a dichotomy which has kept experimental cancer research divided for more than three quarters (...) of a century. This concerns the dichotomy between so-called exogenous and endogenous explanations of cancer causation. This essay mainly focuses on the role of the exogenous/endogenous dichotomy in the reception of research on oncogenic viruses, especially discussing the work of Nobel laureate Peyton Rous on cancer viruses at the Rockefeller Institute. Rous was severely criticised by James Ewing, director of the Memorial Hospital for Cancer and Allied Diseases in New York, who held the idea that the origin of cancer was based in the cell. The twentieth century controversy over oncogenic viruses is placed in the context of the intense discussion over causality in medicine during the first decades of the twentieth century in Germany. It is argued that the oncogene paradigm may be seen as revolutionary because it succeeded in uniting the exogenous and endogenous explanations of cancer in a single paradigm. (shrink)