@article{AdamElsner2020,
  author    = {Adam, Maurits and Elsner, Birgit},
  title     = {The impact of salient action effects on 6-, 7-, and 11-month-olds' goal-predictive gaze shifts for a human grasping action},
  series = {PLOS ONE},
  volume    = {15},
  journal   = {PLOS ONE},
  number    = {10},
  publisher = {Public Library of Science},
  address   = {San Fransisco},
  issn      = {1932-6203},
  doi       = {10.1371/journal.pone.0240165},
  pages     = {18},
  year      = {2020},
  abstract  = {When infants observe a human grasping action, experience-based accounts predict that all infants familiar with grasping actions should be able to predict the goal regardless of additional agency cues such as an action effect. Cue-based accounts, however, suggest that infants use agency cues to identify and predict action goals when the action or the agent is not familiar. From these accounts, we hypothesized that younger infants would need additional agency cues such as a salient action effect to predict the goal of a human grasping action, whereas older infants should be able to predict the goal regardless of agency cues. In three experiments, we presented 6-, 7-, and 11-month-olds with videos of a manual grasping action presented either with or without an additional salient action effect (Exp. 1 and 2), or we presented 7-month-olds with videos of a mechanical claw performing a grasping action presented with a salient action effect (Exp. 3). The 6-month-olds showed tracking gaze behavior, and the 11-month-olds showed predictive gaze behavior, regardless of the action effect. However, the 7-month-olds showed predictive gaze behavior in the action-effect condition, but tracking gaze behavior in the no-action-effect condition and in the action-effect condition with a mechanical claw. The results therefore support the idea that salient action effects are especially important for infants' goal predictions from 7 months on, and that this facilitating influence of action effects is selective for the observation of human hands.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{WenzLevermannWillneretal.2020,
  author    = {Wenz, Leonie and Levermann, Anders and Willner, Sven N. and Otto, Christian and Kuhla, Kilian},
  title     = {Post-Brexit no-trade-deal scenario: short-term consumer benefit at the expense of long-term economic development},
  series = {PLoS ONE},
  volume    = {15},
  journal   = {PLoS ONE},
  number    = {9},
  publisher = {PLOS},
  address   = {San Francisco},
  pages     = {14},
  year      = {2020},
  abstract  = {After the United Kingdom has left the European Union it remains unclear whether the two parties can successfully negotiate and sign a trade agreement within the transition period. Ongoing negotiations, practical obstacles and resulting uncertainties make it highly unlikely that economic actors would be fully prepared to a "no-trade-deal" situation. Here we provide an economic shock simulation of the immediate aftermath of such a post-Brexit no-trade-deal scenario by computing the time evolution of more than 1.8 million interactions between more than 6,600 economic actors in the global trade network. We find an abrupt decline in the number of goods produced in the UK and the EU. This sudden output reduction is caused by drops in demand as customers on the respective other side of the Channel incorporate the new trade restriction into their decision-making. As a response, producers reduce prices in order to stimulate demand elsewhere. In the short term consumers benefit from lower prices but production value decreases with potentially severe socio-economic consequences in the longer term.},
  language  = {en}
}