Search

Interpersonal trust declined worldwide during the COVID-19 pandemic; strategies are needed to restore it. We surveyed 3,065 quota-sampled German-speaking adults residing in the D-A-CH region. Using multinomial logistic regression models and backward elimination for variable selection, we calculated multivariable-adjusted odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) to appraise correlates of interpersonal trust using the Interpersonal Trust Short Scale (KUSIV3). Participants with high levels of interpersonal trust (top KUSIV3 tertile (T3)) tended to be older, male, residents of Switzerland, university degree holders, and workers with higher income and work satisfaction (all Pdiff<0.01) compared to those in the lowest KUSIV3 tertile (T1). Optimism was most strongly associated with high interpersonal trust (ORT3vsT1 = 5.75, 95%CI = 4.33-7.64). Also significantly associated with high interpersonal trust were: Having voted in the last national election (for the opposition, OR = 1.39, 95%CI = 1.02-1.89 or the governing party, OR = 1.61, 95%CI = 1.23-2.11) versus non-voters; perspective taking (ORT3vsT1 = 1.46, 95%CI = 1.11-1.91); being more extraverted (ORT3vsT1 = 1.99, 95%CI = 1.53-2.59) and more agreeable (ORT3vsT1 = 1.95, 95% CI = 1.46-2.61); and scoring higher on complexity thinking (ORT3vsT1 = 1.32, 95%CI = 1.01-1.72). Participants scoring significantly lower for interpersonal trust did not regularly participate in religious meetings (OR = 0.61, 95%CI = 0.44-0.84, versus participation at least monthly); were more conscientious (ORT3vsT1 = 0.68, 95%CI = 0.51-0.91) or current smokers (OR = 0.68; 95%CI = 0.53-0.87, versus never smoking); had sleep problems >5 times a week (OR = 0.48; 95%CI = 0.36-0.66, versus none); and scored high on conspiracy belief (ORT3vsT1 = 0.53; 95%CI = 0.41-0.69). Results differed minimally by gender and country. These findings may be helpful in devising targeted strategies to strengthen interpersonal trust and social engagement in European societies, especially during times of crises., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2023 Schernhammer et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

To build better theories of cities, companies, and other social institutions such as universities, requires that we understand the tradeoffs and complementarities that exist between their core functions, and that we understand bounds to their growth. Scaling theory has been a powerful tool for addressing such questions in diverse physical, biological and urban systems, revealing systematic quantitative regularities between size and function. Here we apply scaling theory to the social sciences, taking a synoptic view of an entire class of institutions. The United States higher education system serves as an ideal case study, since it includes over 5,800 institutions with shared broad objectives, but ranges in strategy from vocational training to the production of novel research, contains public, nonprofit and for-profit models, and spans sizes from 10 to roughly 100,000 enrolled students. We show that, like organisms, ecosystems and cities, universities and colleges scale in a surprisingly systematic fashion following simple power-law behavior. Comparing seven commonly accepted sectors of higher education organizations, we find distinct regimes of scaling between a school's total enrollment and its expenditures, revenues, graduation rates and economic added value. Our results quantify how each sector leverages specific economies of scale to address distinct priorities. Taken together, the scaling of features within a sector along with the shifts in scaling across sectors implies that there are generic mechanisms and constraints shared by all sectors, which lead to tradeoffs between their different societal functions and roles. We highlight the strong complementarity between public and private research universities, and community and state colleges, that all display superlinear returns to scale. In contrast to the scaling of biological systems, our results highlight that much of the observed scaling behavior is modulated by the particular strategies of organizations rather than an immutable set of constraints., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Systems biology is a discipline that studies biological systems from a holistic and interdisciplinary perspective. It brings together biologists, mathematicians, computer scientists, physicists, and engineers, so it has both biology-oriented components and systems-oriented components. We applied several computational tools to analyze the bibliographic information of published articles in systems biology to answer the question: Did the research topics of systems biology become more biology-oriented or more systems-oriented from 1992 to 2013? We analyzed the metadata of 9923 articles on systems biology from the Web of Science database. We identified the most highly cited 330 references using computational tools and through close reading we divided them into nine categories of research types in systems biology. Interestingly, we found that articles in one category, namely, systems biology's applications in medical research, increased tremendously. This finding was corroborated by computational analysis of the abstracts, which also suggested that the percentages of topics on vaccines, diseases, drugs and cancers increased over time. In addition, we analyzed the institutional backgrounds of the corresponding authors of those 9923 articles and identified the most highly cited 330 authors over time. We found that before the mid-1990s, systems-oriented scientists had made the most referenced contributions. However, in recent years, researchers from biology-oriented institutions not only represented a huge percentage of the total number of researchers, but also had made the most referenced contributions. Notably, interdisciplinary institutions only produced a small percentage of researchers, but had made disproportionate contributions to this field., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.