No description available.

Class of 2015 Abstract / Objectives: To assess how likely pharmacy students, faculty, residents and pharmacists will rely on an electronic device when presented with a specific drug name to research and to identify which electronic devices these four particular groups are most likely to use on a daily basis by including students enrolled in the first, second, or third year didactic coursework attending a four-year Doctor of Pharmacy program; faculty members and residents who were associated with a public research university located in the southwestern United States of America; and the pharmacy professional working in a research hospital type setting. Methods: Questionnaires were administered following three different scenarios. The first involved distributing the questionnaire during regularly scheduled classes to the first-year, second-year, and third-year professional pharmacy students. The second involved distributing questionnaires to the faculty and residents to their respective mailboxes and then collecting them at a later date. And the third scenario involved the project advisor distributing the questionnaires to his colleagues at the University of Arizona Medical Center (UAMC), now known as Banner – University Medical Center (Tucson), and then collecting them at a later date. Results: A total of 262 pharmacy students, 12 faculty, and 17 residents and other pharmacists participated in this study. Almost half of the first-year (44%) students do not work while in pharmacy school, 18% for the second-year students, and 9% for the third-year students whereby those who did work while in pharmacy school obtained more exposure to the various drug names currently available versus those who did not work. When comparing each group, having more experience typically resulted in less reliance on an electronic device. The first-year students, having the least experience, relied on an electronic device the most for the USA (3.1), pulled (3.3), and foreign (3.6) drug categories versus the residents and the working professional group (2.4, 2.4, and 3.0, respectively). The p-values for the USA, pulled, and foreign drug categories were all less than 0.001 (p < 0.001) which equates to all three groups being clinically significant. However with the fictitious drug category, the p-value was not clinically significant (p > 0.05). When analyzing the seven drugs currently marketed in the United States (USA), each group (P1, P2, P3, faculty, residents and pharmacists) knew the most about Cialis (2.5, 1.7, 1.2, 1.2, and 0.8) and Nexium (1.5, 1.1, 1.0, 0.5, and 0.3), respectively, versus the five newer drugs. The p-values for these two drugs showed clinical significance (p < 0.001). Conclusions: With the number of new drugs constantly being introduced to the global market, the pharmacist must typically rely heavily on his or her electronic device to provide optimal patient care, but with experience gained comes less reliance on these electronic devices. Both men, women, and the various groups surveyed had similar levels of confidence when reaching for their electronic device. Repeated use of these electronic devices can potentially increase the pharmacist's knowledge about a particular new drug whereby one day, it becomes common knowledge about the drug being dispensed (e.g. Cialis and Nexium). These electronic devices are now included as one of the more common tools found inside the typical pharmacy nowadays alongside the counting tray and spatula. Unfortunately these electronic devices do have their own personal limitations and the pharmacist must still use his or her own clinical judgement.

No description available.

The present study examined how a leader’s behavioural intentions are affected by the trustworthiness of their subordinate using the Affective-Cognitive trust model (Gillespie, 2003; McAllister, 1995). Two-hundred and twenty-five undergraduate students participated in an experimental study that assessed their willingness to engage in reliance and disclosure behaviours based on their perceptions of affective and cognitive trust. Given concerns about the conceptual overlap between trust and liking, we controlled for liking. Consistent with our hypotheses we found that cognitive trust predicted participant’s willingness to engage in reliance behaviours, whereas affective trust predicted participant’s willingness to engage in disclosure behaviours. However, when we controlled for liking, these findings held for disclosure behaviours but did not for reliance behaviours. Limitations of our study and implications for both research and practice are discussed.

Thesis (M.M.)--University of Michigan, 1957.

Thesis (M.M.)--University of Michigan, 1957.

This thesis explores the theoretical basis of precontractual liability for the unilateral breaking-off of negotiations, by undertaking a comparative study between three selected jurisdictions (Germany, France and Chile). It defines a 'paradigm case' and focuses on it in order to find the theoretical basis of this liability. Traditionally, precontractual liability for breaking off negotiations has been founded upon or at least linked with the notion of good faith. This thesis, however, argues that in the selected jurisdictions the true basis of this liability is the notion of 'reliance' and distinguishes two dimensions of reliance (referring to them as 'trust-based' and 'expectation-based'). It analyses the relationship between these dimensions arguing that in the selected jurisdictions the trust-dimension merges with the general principle of good faith and that the expectation-dimension emanates from the trust-dimension. This thesis argues that this innovative approach to the theoretical analysis of the foundation of this liability could have important practical consequences in jurisdictions which do not embrace a general principle of good faith. It focuses on English law, as a contrasting jurisdiction to the selected jurisdictions, in that it rejects a general principle of good faith and, especially, the notion of a duty to negotiate in good faith, which is generally considered to lead necessarily to the rejection of a general principle of precontractual liability. This thesis demonstrates that while English law can provide protection for certain cases of precontractual liability, it currently does not protect the paradigm case. It argues that if the analysis is shifted from good faith to the notion of reliance, English law could develop one or more of its particular solutions in order to protect the paradigm case, if it desired to do so, and explores how such a development could be implemented without establishing a general principle of precontractual liability.

Ensuring "public trust" in AI seems to be a priority for policymakers and the private sector. It is expected that without public trust, such innovations cannot be implemented with legitimacy, and there is a risk of potential public backlash or resistance (for example cases of Cambridge Analytica, predictive policing, or Clearview AI). There is a rich body of research relating to public trust in data use that suggests that "building public trust" can too often place the burden on the public to be "more trusting" and will do little to address other concerns, including whether trust is a desirable and attainable characteristic of human-AI relation. I argue that there is good reason for the public not to trust AI, especially in the absence of regulatory structures that afford genuine accountability, but at the same time AI can be considered reliable. To that end, the main argument of this paper is 1. We are asked to trust an entity that cannot enter the trust relationship, because it doesn’t fulfil the conditions spelled out by the definitions of trust. 2. We are presented with a misdescription of the agent. Who we trust in fact are developers or policy makers. I also argue that the term "reliance" should be used instead of "trust", as by definition it is more fitting current AI applications. Additionally, the focus should be on framing trust as part of practices expected from AI solution providers, developers and regulators.

Mémoire numérisé par la Direction des bibliothèques de l'Université de Montréal.

Thesis (M.C.P.)--Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Dept. of Urban Studies and Planning, 1982. / MICROFICHE COPY AVAILABLE IN ARCHIVES AND ROTCH / Bibliography: leaves 94-95. / by Pamela Wessling. / M.C.P.