The status of contemporary Czech music reviews (also the Czech cultural criticism) ties in with mass culture and trends of postmodern thinking supports. Subjective journalist genres type reviews and critics look like the relevant expert testing about artistic performance, their real aim is economic profitability and fixing a position in their discourse domain. Mass culture can not offer an alternative to itselfa nd that's the reason, why central dichotomy variation - scheme is applicable not only to its products (music CDs, theatrical performances, a new book at he art), but also on the way, which is about these products further talks . Subjective meta - review has a the specific positron in the mass media.

Data-driven approaches to decision making are today applied far and wide. With origins in the field of judgment and decision making (JDM), data-driven decision making (DDDM) has become an emergent topic within I-O psychology, especially within the fields of people analytics and human resource analytics. In light of the current AI revolution, it is evident that the next steps in JDM research include data- driven approaches. The purpose of this Master’s thesis was to compile the research on data-driven decision making conducted across disciplines into a comprehensive overview. Main research questions: based on systematic reviews and scoping reviews about implementations of DDDM affecting individuals, groups, or organizations, what areas of research can be identified? How and to what extent are they linked? To address these questions, this thesis utilizes a scoping meta-review design and bibliometrics. After rigorous search and screening processes, the final sample consisted of n = 1,008 systematic and scoping reviews. The results indicated that there are research areas within the included reviews that are isolated to a varying extent. Based on a multiple correspondence analysis (MCA), five areas of research were identified: business intelligence; learning analytics/education; mHealth/telemedicine; general decision making/decision support; and clinical decision support/diagnosis/healthcare. As a scoping meta-review encompassing a large number of scientific fields and methodologies, this thesis contributes to the progression of DDDM research at large. The results highlight the scattered nature of current research practices within DDDM and identify an opportunity for scientific advancement through interdisciplinary research.

Background: Objectives: To produce and synthesize reliable data, systematic reviews need to adhere to rigorous methodological standards. This living meta-review aims to investigate risk of bias and open science practices in systematic reviews from the educational field published between 2022-2023. The aim of this meta-review is to get a better understanding of the current state of educational research regarding the aforementioned topics.  Methods: Eligibility criteria: We included all systematic reviews of educational interventions, instructions, and methods for all K-12 student populations with experimental or quasi-experimental designs where the outcome variables were academic performance of any kind.  Information sources: We searched through the Education Resources Information Centre (ERIC) for systematic reviews published between 2022-2023. In addition, we also hand searched four scholarly databases. Risk of Bias and FAIR principles: To assess systematic reviews risk of bias and open science practices in systematic reviews two tools were used, ROBIS - Risk of bias in systematic reviews, as well as a FAIR assessment tool.  Results: 44 studies that matched our PICOS were included in this meta-review. Out of these studies four (9%) were deemed as having a low risk of bias. The remaining 40 studies were deemed as either having high risk of bias (89%) or unclear risk of bias (2%).  Among the 44 studies included, only four studies (9%) had their data available, and none of them adhered to all of the items regarding the FAIR principles.  Discussion: This meta-review shows that only a small part of systematic reviews in education can be considered low risk of bias, and an even smaller part can be considered adhering to open science principles. Therefore, much needs to change to adapt to new scientific guidelines.

Thèse de doctorat présenté en vue de l'obtention du doctorat en psychologie - recherche intervention, option psychologie clinique (Ph.D) / Les biais cognitifs sont des tendances qu’ont les individus à traiter l’information d’une certaine manière. Le terme biais réfère au fait que ces tendances sont souvent répétitives et rigides. Bien que l’on retrouve des biais cognitifs chez tous les individus, certains sont plus spécifiquement liés à la psychose et pourraient expliquer certains symptômes liés aux troubles psychotiques. Le premier objectif de cette thèse est d’examiner le niveau de preuve, ainsi que la taille de l’effet de l’association entre les biais de raisonnement et d’interprétation et les caractéristiques psychotiques (troubles psychotiques, symptômes psychotiques, expériences psychotiques sous-cliniques (psychotic-like experiences) et le risque de développer une psychose (psychosis risk)) ainsi que le niveau de preuve et la taille de l’effet des interventions psychologiques sur les biais cognitifs auprès de personnes ayant des caractéristiques psychotiques. Le deuxième objectif est d’explorer les biais cognitifs de manière transdiagnostique chez les individus ayant un trouble psychotique ou un trouble dépressif majeur. La première étude est une méta-revue portant sur les biais cognitifs associés aux caractéristiques psychotiques, et sur l’effet des interventions psychologique sur la modification des bais cognitifs. Cent-vingt-trois résultats provenant de quinze méta-analyses ont été évalués à l’aide du système Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE; Gotlib, 2010). Les résultats ont montré qu’un niveau de preuve modéré à élevé soutenait les liens en des caractéristiques psychotiques et certains biais cognitifs, notamment : les biais d’interprétation lorsque étudiés regroupés, l’externalisation des événements cognitifs, le biais d’autoprotection (self-serving bias), l’attribution d’intentions hostiles, la saillance aberrante, le biais d’inflexibilité cognitive ou (belief inflexibility bias) (lorsque mesuré avec Maudsley Assessment of Delusions Schedule (MADS ; Wessely et al., 1993) et le biais de sauter aux conclusions (jump to conclusions) lorsqu’étudiées avec des tâches expérimentales (le biais de la collecte de données (data-gathering bias)). Les autres biais étudiés par les méta-analyses incluses dans la méta-revue ne sont pas soutenus par un niveau de preuve suffisante (le biais de personnalisation (personalizing bias), le biais contre les indices infirmatoires (bias against disconfirmatory evidence ; BADE), le biais contre les indices confirmatoires (bias against confirmatory evidence ;BACE), et le biais d’acceptation libérale (liberal acceptance bias)). Certains biais cognitifs étaient notamment liés aux symptômes similaires à la psychose chez des personnes en santé et chez des personnes à risque élevé de psychose. Un niveau de preuve modéré-élevé soutient un petit effet de taille des interventions psychologiques sur les biais cognitifs. La deuxième étude est une validation francophone du CBQp. Le questionnaire a été traduit et validé auprès de personnes ayant un trouble psychotique (N=30), un trouble dépressif (N=32) et dans un groupe normatif (N=663). Une analyse transdiagnostique par regroupements hiérarchiques de profils de biais cognitifs a également été réalisée. Nos résultats ont révélé une structure factorielle similaire à celle des auteurs originaux, avec la solution à un facteur (évaluation d’un score de biais cognitifs global) étant la meilleure, mais les solutions à deux facteurs (évaluation de biais divisés en deux thèmes liés à la psychose) et cinq facteurs (évaluation de cinq biais cognitifs différents) étaient les plus intéressantes cliniquement. Finalement, une solution à six regroupements a émergé de l’analyse par regroupements hiérarchiques, suggérant que des individus ayant des diagnostics similaires peuvent avoir des profils de biais cognitifs différents, et que des individus ayant des diagnostics différents peuvent avoir des profils de biais cognitifs similaires. Davantage d’études et de méta-analyses sont nécessaires pour mieux identifier les liens entre certains biais cognitifs et les caractéristiques psychotiques pour lesquels il n’y a aucune méta-analyse sur des échantillons cliniques, tels que le biais d’attribution d’intentions hostiles (hostility attribution bias), la saillance aberrante et le biais de sauter aux conclusions (lorsque mesurés avec des questionnaires autorapportés). D'autres biais étudiés par des méta-analyses chez des populations cliniques (par exemple, le biais de personnalisation, le biais contre les indices infirmatoires, le biais contre les indices confirmatoires et le biais d'acceptation libérale) doivent encore faire l'objet de recherches supplémentaires de qualité avant de pouvoir conclure sur leur relation avec les caractéristiques psychotiques. Une méta-analyse clarifiant les biais cognitifs spécifiques qui sont altérés par des interventions cognitives (spécifiques également) pourrait nous aider à mieux comprendre les composantes les plus efficaces des interventions sur les différents biais cognitifs, et ainsi améliorer les interventions actuelles. Les associations entre différents biais cognitifs et les symptômes similaires à la psychose dans les études analogues suggèrent également que d’autres groupes populationnels pourraient bénéficier d’interventions ciblant les biais cognitifs, la présence de ces biais et symptômes se retrouvant sur un spectre. Finalement, les résultats de notre deuxième étude nous laissent croire qu’il serait intéressant d’évaluer la présence de différents biais cognitifs de manière transdiagnostique à l’aide d’autres instruments de mesure. Notre version francophone du questionnaire de biais cognitifs pour la psychose pourra être utilisée auprès de populations francophones. / Cognitive biases are individual tendencies to process information in a certain way. The term bias refers to the fact that these tendencies are often rigid and repetitive. Although cognitive biases are found in all individuals, some are more specifically related to psychosis and may explain some of the symptoms associated with psychotic disorders. The first aim of this thesis is to examine the quality of evidence and effect size of the association between reasoning and interpretation biases and psychotic features (psychotic disorders, psychotic symptoms, psychotic-like experiences and psychosis risk) as well as the quality of evidence and effect size of psychotic interventions on cognitive biases in individuals with psychotic features. The second objective is to explore cognitive biases transdiagnostically in individuals with a psychotic disorder or a major depressive disorder. The first study is a meta-review on cognitive biases associated with psychotic features, and on the effects of psychological interventions on cognitive biases. One hundred and twenty-three outcomes from 15 meta-analyses were assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE; Gotlib, 2010). The results showed that moderate to high-quality evidence supported links between psychotic features and certain cognitive biases, namely: interpretation biases when studied together, the externalization of cognitive events, the self-serving bias, the hostility attributions bias, the aberrant salience bias, belief inflexibility bias (when measured with Maudsley Assessment of Delusions Schedule (MADS; Wessely et al., 1993) and the jumping to conclusion bias when measured with experimental tasks (the data-gathering bias). The other biases studied by the meta-analyses included in the meta-review are not supported by sufficient quality of evidence (the personalizing bias, the bias against disconfirmatory evidence, the bias against confirmatory evidence, and the liberal acceptance bias). Some cognitive biases were notably related to psychosis-like symptoms in healthy people and in people at high risk of psychosis. Moderate-high-quality evidence supports a small effect size of psychological interventions on cognitive biases. The second study is a French validation of the CBQp. The questionnaire was translated and validated with people with a psychotic disorder (N=30), a depressive disorder (N=32) and in a normative group (N=663). A cross-diagnostic analysis by hierarchical clustering of cognitive bias profiles was also performed. Our results showed a similar factor structure to that of the original authors, with the one-factor solution (assessment of a global cognitive bias score) being the strongest, but the two-factor (assessment of biases divided into two psychosis-related themes) and five-factor (assessment of five different cognitive biases) solutions being the most clinically interesting. Finally, a six-cluster solution emerged from the hierarchical cluster analysis, suggesting that individuals with similar diagnoses may have different cognitive bias profiles, and that individuals with different diagnoses may have similar cognitive bias profiles. More studies and meta-analyses are needed to better understand links between certain cognitive biases and psychotic features, including the hostility attribution bias and the aberrant salience, and the jump to conclusions bias when measured with self-report questionnaires, for which there is no meta-analysis in clinical studies. Other biases studied reviewed by meta-analyses on clinical populations (e.g. the personalizing bias, the bias against disconfirmatory evidence, the bias against confirmatory evidence, and the liberal acceptance bias) still need further quality research before being able to conclude about their relation with psychotic characteristics. A meta-analysis of the effect of specific psychological interventions on the different cognitive biases targeted by them could also help us to identify which specific interventions are effective on the different cognitive biases, and thus improve current interventions. Associations between different cognitive biases and psychosis-like symptoms in non-clinical studies also suggest that other population groups may benefit from interventions that have been developed to target cognitive biases, as the presence of these biases and symptoms occur across a spectrum. Finally, the results from our second study suggest that it would be interesting to assess the presence of different cognitive biases transdiagnostically using other measurement instruments. Our French version of the cognitive bias questionnaire for psychosis is now available to be used with French-speaking populations.