Kohei Ueda’s research while affiliated with Kyushu University and other places

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to instructions and suggestions from governments and experts to maintain social (physical) distance between people to prevent aerosol transmission of the virus, which is now becoming the norm. Thus, we examined whether the pandemic extended the distance between personal belongings. Methods: We recruited 68 university students and instructed them to place their belongings on a long table following another participant (i.e., confederate). We measured the physical distance between the two belongings (i.e., the participant’s and the confederate’s). We collected data between June 10, 2022 and January 23, 2023. Pre-pandemic data was from Ariga (2016). Analysis was completed with one-tailed t -tests. Results: Compared with the pre-pandemic results, via one-tailed t -test, the distance between the two belongings during the pandemic was significantly longer. Our results supported the hypothesis that the psychological framework for processing people’s belongings has dramatically changed during this pandemic. Conclusion: This change may have been driven by social distancing practices or an increase in perceived vulnerability to disease. Our results provide new implications for future public spatial design, in other words, not only the distance between people, but also the distance between their belongings.

Scientists write research articles, process ethics reviews, evaluate proposals and research, and seek funding. Several strategies have been proposed to optimize these operations and to decentralize access to research resources and opportunities. For instance, we previously proposed the trinity review method, combining registered reports with financing and research ethics assessments. However, previously proposed systems have a number of shortcomings, including how to implement them, e.g., who manages them, how incentives for reviewers are paid, etc. Various solutions have been proposed to address these issues, employing methods based on blockchain technologies, called “decentralized science (DeSci)”. Decentralized approaches that exploit these developments offer potentially profound improvements to the troubled scientific ecosystem. Here, we propose a system that integrates ethics reviews, peer reviews, and funding in a decentralized manner, based on Web3 technology. This new method, named ABCDEF publishing, would enhance the speed, fairness, and transparency of scientific research and publishing.

Scientists write research articles, process ethics reviews, evaluate proposals and research, and seek funding. Several strategies have been proposed to optimize these operations and to decentralize access to research resources and opportunities. For instance, we previously proposed the trinity review method, combining registered reports with financing and research ethics assessments. However, previously proposed systems have a number of shortcomings, including how to implement them, e.g., who manages them, how incentives for reviewers are paid, etc. Various solutions have been proposed to address these issues, employing methods based on blockchain technologies, called “decentralized science (DeSci)”. Decentralized approaches that exploit these developments offer potentially profound improvements to the troubled scientific ecosystem. Here, we propose a system that integrates ethics reviews, peer reviews, and funding in a decentralized manner, based on Web3 technology. This new method, named ABCDEF publishing, would enhance the speed, fairness, and transparency of scientific research and publishing.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to instructions and suggestions from governments and experts to maintain social (physical) distance between people to prevent aerosol transmission of the virus, which is now becoming the norm. Thus, we examined whether the pandemic extended the distance between personal belongings. Methods: We recruited 68 university students and instructed them to place their belongings on a long table following another participant (i.e., confederate). We measured the physical distance between the two belongings (i.e., the participant’s and the confederate’s). We collected data between June 10, 2022 and January 23, 2023. Pre-pandemic data was from Ariga (2016). Analysis was completed with one-tailed t -tests. Results: Compared with the pre-pandemic results, via one-tailed t -test, the distance between the two belongings during the pandemic was significantly longer. Our results supported the hypothesis that the psychological framework for processing people’s belongings has dramatically changed during this pandemic. Conclusion: This change may have been driven by social distancing practices or an increase in perceived vulnerability to disease. Our results provide new implications for future public spatial design, in other words, not only the distance between people, but also the distance between their belongings.

One major source of exhaustion for researchers is the redundant paperwork of three different documents—research papers, ethics review applications, and research grant applications—for the same research plan. This is a wasteful and redundant process for researchers, and it has a more direct impact on the career development of early-career researchers. Here, we propose a trinity review system based on Registered Reports that integrates scientific, ethics, and research funding reviews. In our proposed trinity review system, scientific and ethics reviews are undertaken concurrently for a research protocol before running the study. After the protocol is approved in principle through these review processes, a funding review will take place, and the researchers will begin their research. Following the experiments or surveys, the scientific review will be conducted on a completed version of the paper again, including the results and discussions (i.e., the full paper), and the full paper will be published once it has passed the second review. This paper provides the brief process of the trinity review system and discusses the need for and benefits of the proposed system. Although the trinity review system only applies to a few appropriate disciplines, it helps improve reproducibility and integrity.

Scientists write research articles, process ethics reviews, evaluate proposals and research, and seek funding. Several strategies have been proposed to optimize these operations and to decentralize access to research resources and opportunities. For instance, we previously proposed the trinity review method, combining registered reports with financing and research ethics assessments. However, previously proposed systems have a number of shortcomings, including how to implement them, e.g., who manages them, how incentives for reviewers are paid, etc. Various solutions have been proposed to address these issues, employing decentralized science (DeSci) in an independent organization built on the blockchain. Decentralized approaches that exploit these developments offer potentially profound improvements to the troubled scientific ecosystem. Here, we propose a system that integrates ethics reviews, peer reviews, and funding in a decentralized manner, based on Web3 technology. This new method, named ABCDEF publishing, would enhance the speed, fairness, and transparency of scientific research and publishing.

Caruso et al. (2013) reported the Temporal Doppler Effect (TDE), in which people feel that the past is farther than the future. In this study, we made two high-power (N = 2244 in total), direct replication studies of Caruso et al., and additionally examined whether illusory temporal expansion, depending on the degree of fulfillment in durations, is related to the TDE. We predicted that the past would be felt farther than the future because the filling rate of duration of the past should be higher than that of the future. The results showed that psychological distance was significantly closer in the past than in the future and was inconsistently correlated with the filling rate of duration or the number and length of events and errands. Further, in some cases, the correlations were significant in the opposite direction of the predictions. Overall, our results did not replicate the previous findings but were reversed, and the filling rate of duration failed to explain the psychological distance. Based on these findings, we highlight the aspects that need to be clarified in future TDE studies. Preregistered Stage 1 protocol: https://osf.io/d9ec3/(date of in-principle acceptance: 19/04/2022)

People feel some events to be psychologically closer, while others to be farther away. Caruso et al. (2013) reported the Temporal Doppler Effect (TDE), in which people feel that the past is farther than the future, despite an equivalent objective temporal distance. They hypothesized that movement based on the spatio-temporal metaphor implies an asymmetry in psychological distance in time and explained the TDE from this perspective. In the current study, we made a high-power (N = 2244 in total), direct replication of the study by Caruso et al. as a registered report, and examined whether temporal expansion depending on the degree of fulfillment in durations found in time perception studies is related to the TDE. We predicted that the past would be felt farther than the future because past experiences form definite and numerous memory traces, and the filling rate of duration of the past should be higher than that of the future. The results showed that psychological distance was significantly closer in the past than in the future in both Studies 1 and 2. Moreover, the filling rate of duration was significantly higher in the past than in the future, as predicted, but was negligible (Study 1) or negatively (Study 2) correlated with psychological distance. Overall, our results did not replicate the previous findings but were reversed, and the filling rate of duration failed to explain psychological distance. Based on these findings, we discuss what needs to be clarified in future TDE studies.

Economic inequality is associated with preferences for smaller, immediate gains over larger, delayed ones. Such temporal discounting may feed into rising global inequality, yet it is unclear whether it is a function of choice preferences or norms, or rather the absence of sufficient resources for immediate needs. It is also not clear whether these reflect true differences in choice patterns between income groups. We tested temporal discounting and five intertemporal choice anomalies using local currencies and value standards in 61 countries (N = 13,629). Across a diverse sample, we found consistent, robust rates of choice anomalies. Lower-income groups were not significantly different, but economic inequality and broader financial circumstances were clearly correlated with population choice patterns.