No abstract

Implicit or unconscious bias is one the significant contributors to inequalities. Implicit bias is a common occurrence in our society that leads to discrimination in many different institutions at various levels. If we do not mitigate our bias, we risk perpetuating inequalities in our organizations.  This self-reflection reviews, in a 3-part manuscript, some of the most important issues and challenges in navigating and supporting marginalized identities in dominant spaces. Part I of the manuscript focuses on the implicit bias manifestations and the importance of self-awareness in promoting inclusivity. One of the ways in which we can create, promote, and sustain interpersonal inclusivity in our organizations is to prepare for microaggressions before they arise. Microaggressions are the common, persistent slights that non-dominant groups in our society face on a daily basis. Another way to promote inclusivity is to explore our identities to promote self-awareness and find common-ground to mitigate microaggressive behavior. This manuscript is written for three reasons. One, to provide guidance on how to navigate our marginalized identities. Two, this manuscript provides guidance on how to navigate our dominant identities. Three, this manuscript fills a gap in the field related to the experiences of those among us with marginalized identities. This autoethnography or self-reflection will help to empower not only myself but others, especially those of us at the margins (e.g., people of color, women, non-Christians, the LGBTQ community).    Article Type: Commentary

EXECUTIVE SUMMARYIn making decisions, production managers usually rely on information contained in reports generated by an information system. Unfortunately, a production manager is likely to receive a report that best supports his/her de~sion-making style only by chance. This investi~tion studies the individual differences in decision-making style for production managers making production scheduling decisions, and the decision support design that best supports their decisions.Ninety-six subjects classified by decision-making style (Myers-Briggs Classification) acted as production managers in a simulated production environment. Sequential production scheduling decisions were made based on reports generated by a compute~~d production simulator. The simulator was an interactive program that simulates a production task in a single-product organization.Based upon the information contained in the reports, managers developed production schedules for the firm's next production run and input their decisions into the simulator, which then generated the reports for that run. The managers' objective was to minimize the firm's total cost. ~ci~on-making style and the type of report were examined as inde~ndent variables in the study. The dependent variables were decision time, decision confidence, and total cost of production.Thus, a manager's performance was measured by decision time, confidence, and the manager's total cost.Each manager was classified by decision-making style and received as output one of four report designs, i.e., tabular-raw data, tabular-summarized data, graphical-raw data, or graphical-summarized data.The results of the experiment suggest that for production decision support systems there are report designs better suited to certain decision-making styles than others for scheduling decisions. However, the results indicate that managers with certain decision-making styles can make effective scheduling decisions with more than one type of report design. The implications of the results are illustrated by means of example MRP reports.

Are we alone? The study of technosignatures, physical manifestations of technology from extraterrestrial intelligences, is a rigorous astrobiological sub-discipline. The Planetary Science decadal should include searches for technosignatures alongside biosignatures in its recommendations for funding a robust astrobiology research portfolio.

Over the past 10 years, the Psychology Department at Indiana University Kokomo has worked to incorporate more opportunities for students to engage in undergraduate research throughout the psychology curriculum. Our previous requirements included a lower level methods course that most students took prior to statistics, with the result that students did not have the opportunity to practice the use of statistics in research contexts unless they completed an independent research project during their senior year. We made several curricular changes to enhance these opportunities to apply statistical knowledge, to increase research literacy and critical analysis, and to better prepare students who go on to complete an independent research project. The lower level methods course was redesigned to explore psychology as a major and career, introduce research concepts, and help students develop critical thinking skills. We also reinstated an upper level methods course with statistics as a prerequisite, allowing better integration of statistics with research methods. Most recently, in fall 2018, we added a lab to the upper level methods course, in which students use computer-based statistical software for data analysis. In addition to these curricular changes, the department has recently been promoting and facilitating more student travel to research conferences throughout the undergraduate program. In this article, we describe the program we designed to scaffold student research and present a six-level framework applicable across a broad range of disciplines. We also present data collected from current students and alumni in psychology to assess their perceptions of the impact of these changes on their research confidence and competence as well as limited results from assessment of student learning. Finally, we provide recommendations for other programs interested in increasing opportunities for student research in their disciplines.