Rock, Paper, Scissors (RPS) represents a unique gaming space in which the predictions of human rational decision-making can be compared with actual performance. Playing a computerized opponent adopting a mixed-strategy equilibrium, participants revealed a non-significant tendency to over-select Rock. Further violations of rational decision-making were observed using an inter-trial analysis where participants were more likely to switch their item selection at trial n + 1 following a loss or draw at trial n, revealing the strategic vulnerability of individuals following the experience of negative rather than positive outcome. Unique switch strategies related to each of these trial n outcomes were also identified: after losing participants were more likely to ‘downgrade’ their item (e.g., Rock followed by Scissors) but after drawing participants were more likely to ‘upgrade’ their item (e.g., Rock followed by Paper). Further repetition analysis revealed that participants were more likely to continue their specific cyclic item change strategy into trial n + 2. The data reveal the strategic vulnerability of individuals following the experience of negative rather than positive outcome, the tensions between behavioural and cognitive influences on decision making, and underline the dangers of increased behavioural predictability in other recursive, non-cooperative environments such as economics and politics.

Objectives. To assess effectiveness, safety, and acceptability of follow‐up regimens for oral dysplasia with regards to malignant transformation rate and duration to transformation. Method. Study design–Systematic literature review with criteria for identifying studies, assessing quality and data extraction. Selection criteria–Cohort studies, case‐control studies, or randomised‐controlled trials (RCTs). Interventions–Clinical follow‐up and surveillance, surgical and non‐surgical treatment, modification of aetiological factors. Outcome measures–Malignant transformation rate, predictive value of clinical prognostic indicators. Data collection and analysis–Using selection criteria, we identified published data by electronic searching. The validity of studies and extracted data was independently assessed by two authors. Quantitative data is compared and summarized in a table. Qualitative data is also discussed. Results. There are no RCTs assessing follow‐up strategies. Nineteen cohort studies (level II and III evidence) reported follow‐up, of which 12 were included in the meta‐analysis. The malignant transformation rate varies widely between studies (6.6–36.0%). Surgical treatment appears to be more effective than non‐surgical modalities, but recurrence is high. Tobacco and alcohol use, site and histological grade of the lesion are associated with progression to cancer. Conclusions. There is currently no evidence‐based or consensus strategy for malignant risk quantification and follow‐up of patients with oral dysplasia. We present a follow‐up protocol based on best evidence. Large randomised‐controlled trials are needed to assess these new strategies, including the use of molecular markers to quantify risk and follow‐up these lesions.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Investigations of concurrent task and modality switching effects have to date been studied under conditions of uni-modal stimulus presentation. As such, it is difficult to directly compare resultant task and modality switching effects, as the stimuli afford both tasks on each trial, but only one modality. The current study investigated task and modality switching using bi-modal stimulus presentation under various cue conditions: task and modality (double cue), either task or modality (single cue) or no cue. Participants responded to either the identity or the position of an audio–visual stimulus. Switching effects were defined as staying within a modality/task (repetition) or switching into a modality/task (change) from trial n − 1 to trial n, with analysis performed on trial n data. While task and modality switching costs were sub-additive across all conditions replicating previous data, modality switching effects were dependent on the modality being attended, and task switching effects were dependent on the task being performed. Specifically, visual responding and position responding revealed significant costs associated with modality and task switching, while auditory responding and identity responding revealed significant gains associated with modality and task switching. The effects interacted further, revealing that costs and gains associated with task and modality switching varying with the specific combination of modality and task type. The current study reconciles previous data by suggesting that efficiently processed modality/task information benefits from repetition while less efficiently processed information benefits from change due to less interference of preferred processing across consecutive trials.