A Social-Organizational Psychology Ph.D. candidate.
Research interests: animal advocacy, promoting plant-based choicesâpossibly with AI, and alternative proteins.
Skills: SPSS, Jamovi, and R.
Rakefet Cohen Ben-Arye đ¸
Karma: 247
An important topic!
Regarding the Symmetric AI Access and Application, to take advantage of it, I think we should adopt an AI culture, as mentioned by @Richie.Having a special expert for AI in every organization is not enough. We have to be all AI-positive as team members in our own workplace. We cannot leave it to one person. We cannot throw money at the problem.
And adopting an AI culture as a collective is much harder. As I see it, in academia, where I came from, we cannot tell students, âHere is the most powerful tool we ever hadâdonât use it.â
As for research, one practical recommendation I have is to use tools like Research Kick to find research gaps. You may not know that numerous researchers, including one from NASA, have discovered that AI can conceive of research ideas that took them years to develop on their own in just minutes. We have to not let our egos prevent us from being effective.
But it happens outside of academia, too (not where I am positioned, luckily). Using AI is seen as cheating. However, it is not cheating if you use it to deliver better results and utilize your own intelligence to accomplish tasks that AI cannot yet do during the rest of your time.
We should be lifelong learners, especially when it comes to new AI tools. I personally learn about new AI platforms every day from YouTube on the go. The AI gap is only widening between the profit and nonprofit sectors, as Kyle Behrend says. Speaking of symmetries and asymmetries, we aim to prevent an asymmetric disadvantage as nonprofits adopt AI.
Great, I wish I had it a long time ago! I created an account and a NotebookLM episode about it.
I know weâre all rational people here, but I would suggest adding an option for users to customize their profile picture, background image, and QR code.
We want people to include this on their websites, and many would prefer it to be visually appealing.
As someone in the behavioral science field, I believe these features have a disproportionately influential impact.
Additionally, perhaps adding a web carousel on the main website that showcases specific use cases for requesting donations, rather than limiting this information to the newsletter.
Otherwise, a very user-friendly, simplicity-driven, convenience-first website!
Thanks for brainstorming our comparative advantage!
I think it all depends on whether weâre wise enough to leverage it:
Motivational asymmetryâwe need to care enough and encourage others to prioritize it over other priorities. The animal industry has the money, so we need to be equally attractive.
Truth asymmetryâwe need to make people care about the truth.
Efficiency asymmetryâagreed.
Agility asymmetryâagreed.
Ceiling asymmetryâyou can equally say that the animal-based agriculture already has the resources and experience using them, which is an advantage to the other side.
Cooperation asymmetryâif weâre smart enough to overcome infighting.
So, I think that all of these can be our comparative advantageâbut only if we seize the opportunity.
Defaults make a difference. I submitted my form based on your post, and I wanted to say thank you for bringing it to our attention!
By the way, you might want to connect with Robbie Lockie. Heâs created an AI tool specifically designed to enhance the form-filling experience, helping to send a pre-filled yet personalized message when sending feedback, petitions, and similar communications. It could be worth reaching out to see if thereâs potential to integrate with his AI solution.
Hey @Maxtandy, thanks for the kind words and for your insightful questions!
Youâre right, itâs important to be transparent about the data.
To answer your questions:
Participants: The 70,000 engagements refer to the total number of interactions (likes, comments, shares) across all our platforms. The 600+ daily check-ins are from our WeChat Mini Program, which is a separate platform used for tracking individual participation.
Reach: The 7 million people reached refers to the estimated number of individuals who saw our campaign materials across various platforms. This includes social media posts, ads, and media coverage.
Follow-through: Youâre right, the follow-through rate is lower than weâd like, but itâs still a significant number of people making changes to their diet.
Non-binary: Itâs great to see such a high representation of non-binary individuals in our campaign. Itâs possible that thereâs a selection effect, as you mentioned, and individuals who are open to plant-based diets are also more likely to be open to diverse identities.
Tree planting: We partnered with the Alashan SEE Ecology Association because we believe that addressing climate change is vital.
Thanks again for your interest and for engaging in this vital conversation!
I would really love to see the Good Food Institute (GFI) included on the list as well!
Good Food Institute (GFI), since it has made significant strides, as highlighted in my video based on their report.
In summary, some of GFIâs notable accomplishments include:
1. Receiving President Biden support in setting alternative protein as a focus area
2. Raising awareness to alternative protein at the UNâs COP27 climate conference
3. Collaborating with Upside Foods on chicken substitutes
4. Awarding $4 million in research grantsThese achievements demonstrate GFIâs impact on advancing sustainable food solutions.
My answer would remain the same for small and large donations.
We shouldnât let the âDrop in the oceanâ mentality discourage us as much as it often does. Whether you accomplish something on your own and can claim full credit, or as part of a group where youâre one of many contributors, what truly matters is that you achieve your goal.
Thank you for highlighting our research! Check out the post we wrote about it in this forum.
I believe these are several successful applications of the identifiable victim effect: Maxineâs Dash for Freedom, Okja, Babe, and Axel, Calf 269.
Some pitfalls to avoid, in my opinion:
⢠Some people seem to care specifically for the identified victim, like calf 269, rather than realizing they represent other sentient beings with their own stories and backgrounds.
⢠The identifiable victim effect doesnât impact everyone equally: individual differences in analytic processing style affect how different request types influence donations. Less-analytic thinkers donate more to a single identified victim than statistical victims or a combination; more-analytic thinkers showed no differences. This seems to be the story of our (analytical) movement. I think the curse of knowledge prevents us from understanding how little others know about biases, like the identified victim effect. We assume everyone is as rational as us and donât fully grasp the potential of a story about a single individual with a name and face.
What makes a single individual identifiable?
It can range from simply referring to them as the victim to creating a full-length film, and I suspect the film would be more effective (...)
But we donât always approach it this way. We often use a description that could apply to any cow in the dairy industry, just changing the name: This is Sarah. She produces nearly 11,000 gallons of milkâmore than 200,000 cupsâduring her lifetime. Her calf will be taken away from her within hours of birth.
For fish, itâs even worseâwe describe them as masses and focus on the ecological damage, overlooking the animals themselves.
How many words could you use to describe your petâs personality?
I can describe two of our rabbits:
Judie is promotion-driven. Sheâs always looking for treats. Sheâs intelligent and responds to her name. Her favorite snack is cranberries; while eating, sheâs always searching for the source of her treats, not just focusing on whatâs in front of her. Sheâs friendly, seeks company, is peaceful, and gets along with others. Sheâs self-confident and happy.
Gaya is more prevention-driven. Sheâs shy and looks for hiding spots. She seeks tunnels and security and doesnât get along with others. Nevertheless, she was the first to learn to play with a ball and get treats. Ball games became her favorite activity after she successfully found treats during her first play. Sheâs more reserved and trusts her closer circle of friends.
We should be able to provide that description level for any identified victim.
Hi, thanks so much for being here! Could you please talk me through the rationale for assigning moral value to non-human animals?
This is a masterpiece.
These were the key points for me from the article:Unitarianism: the view that the moral value of welfare is independent of a beingâs species. Even if we value one unit of human welfare one hundred times more than one unit of another animalâs welfare, the conclusion still supports prioritizing animal welfare
1$=200 hens: corporate campaigns can spare over 200 hens from cage confinement for each dollar spent, according to GiveWell.
1,000: The average cost-effectiveness of cage-free campaigns is on the order of 1,000 times that of GiveWellâs top charities. Even if the campaignsâ marginal cost-effectiveness is ten times worse than the average, it would still be one hundred times more cost-effective
17%: Open Philanthropy has allocated an average of only 17% of its neartermist funding to animal welfare each year
Controversial: Yes, animal welfare is âcontroversial,â but so is AI risk, which is one of Open Philanthropyâs priorities.
I would like to add that if you perform an intervention to shift society towards a more plant-based diet, you have solved all of the animalâs problems as opposed to the case in which you prevented malaria, for example, in which some problems for the same individual still remain.
I was recommended Perplexity for looking for course materials.
You can search academic databases, as well as perform broad searches on the web or YouTube.Provide context like ChatGPT does. For your purpose, mention that you are building a course on artificial intelligence and psychology and give details about it.
Hi Seth, thatâs really interesting!
I noticed youâve included the default effect in your work. I have some article summaries that might be helpful, especially if youâre still in the process of reviewing additional papers.
In fact, weâre planning to measure actual plant-based choices in our next experiment, so your insights are particularly valuable!
Thumbs up!
I run 3 Facebook pages but I still use now Stay Focused. Recommended!
Hi,
Iâm a Psychology graduate.
If you or anyone else from Effective Altruism is struggling, please contact me! âĽ
Iâm not a clinical psychologist (Iâm currently a social psychology MA student) but I started up my studies because I love people and want to help them. So at least I can listen (on Skype /â Whatsapp).
My Facebook: https://ââwww.facebook.com/ââOpnCgs
Done. Thanks a lot for your post!
I think it also depends on what you already have and how much you think you can improve.
From Social Psychology I know that personality rarely changes. Skills do.
So if you are an inrovert (which is by the way, the most stable characteristic), not agreeable, not consciouscious (meaning not hard working), not open to experience (uncurious) or neurotic, sadly there is a little to be done about it.
You can improve little âislandsâ in your personality, like setting clear goals as a leader (I guess), but a lot of soft skills are ranging between obvious to easier said than done.
Is the soft skill too easy for you? Is it too hard? I guess the best fit will be a challenging skillâa bit too hard for you to step out of your comfort zone, but not to be overwhelmed.
âFocus on the seeds, not the trees. What seeds are you planting today?â
âYou should be far more concerned with your current trajectory than with your current results.â
âIf youâre working hard on the right thing, you donât need to worry about results. The outcome will come. Itâs just a matter of time.â
- James Clear
Your post captured it. If weâre focused on the right thing, all we need is time.