Explore the vast range of titles available.

\"You're a coward.\" Time and again, as the New Year approaches, that charge is leveled against Armand Gamache. While the residents of the Quebec village of Three Pines take advantage of the deep snow to ski and toboggan, to drink hot chocolate in the bistro and share meals together, the Chief Inspector finds his holiday with his family interrupted by a simple request. He's asked to provide security for what promises to be a non-event. A visiting Professor of Statistics will be giving a lecture at the nearby university. While he is perplexed as to why the head of homicide for the Sûreté du Québec would be assigned this task, it sounds easy enough. That is until Gamache starts looking into Professor Abigail Robinson and discovers an agenda so repulsive he begs the university to cancel the lecture. They refuse, citing academic freedom, and accuse Gamache of censorship and intellectual cowardice. Before long, Professor Robinson's views start seeping into conversations. Spreading and infecting. So that truth and fact, reality and delusion are so confused it's nearly impossible to tell them apart. Discussions become debates, debates become arguments, which turn into fights. As sides are declared, a madness takes hold. Abigail Robinson promises that, if they follow her, ça va bien aller, all will be well. But not, Gamache and his team know, for everyone. When a murder is committed, it falls to Armand Gamache, his second-in-command Jean-Guy Beauvoir, and their team to investigate the crime as well as this extraordinary popular delusion. And the madness of crowds. Provided by publisher

Social isolation is a critical but understudied concern for people living with HIV (PLHIV), particularly in rural U.S. communities where social visibility is high and access to supportive services is limited. Disclosure of HIV status is often framed as a health-promoting behavior that facilitates engagement with care and access to social support, yet it can also increase vulnerability to exclusion and isolation, especially where confidentiality is difficult to maintain. Using data from a pilot survey of rural PLHIV in the United States (n=17), this study examines when disclosure may function adaptively and when it may coincide with a heightened social burden. A Social Isolation Index was constructed from 15 indicators of exclusion across family, community, and institutional domains. Disclosure was measured both by the number of people informed and whether sexual partners were told. Typological methods and Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) were applied to explore how disclosure patterns relate to race, sexual identity, and reported isolation. The results indicate that disclosure is not uniformly protective: several participants who disclosed widely also reported high levels of isolation, with heterosexual and Black participants often reporting a higher cumulative burden. These findings challenge one-size-fits-all assumptions about disclosure in public health messaging and underscore the need for tailored strategies that recognize both disclosure and nondisclosure as potentially adaptive responses in rural and marginalized communities.

Background Men who have sex with men (MSM) globally have a high burden of curable sexually transmitted infections (STIs). MSM do not frequently receive rectal STI testing because of several barriers, such as not being out (disclosure of sexual behavior). We evaluate whether Chinese MSM select an STI test (rectal vs urethral) appropriate for their sexual behavior (insertive and/or receptive), and the interactions with being out. Methods This was a secondary analysis of data from a cross sectional MSM survey conducted at a multisite randomized controlled trial (RCT) (December 2018 to January 2019) around uptake of gonorrhea and chlamydia testing among Chinese MSM ( N  = 431). We collected socio demographics, relevant medical and sexual history, and disclosure of sexual behavior (outness). We estimated the decision to test and test choice, and the extent to which disclosure plays a role in decision making. Results Among 431 MSM, mean age was 28 years (SD = 7.10) and 65% were out to someone. MSM who indicated versatile sexual behavior and were out to someone had a 26.8% (95%CI = 6.1, 47.5) increased likelihood for selecting the rectal test vs the ure thral test, compared to those versatile and not out. Versatile MSM out to their health provider outside of the study context had a 29.4% (95%CI = 6.3, 52.6) greater likelihood for selecting the rectal STI test vs the urethral test, compared to versatile MSM not out to their health provider. Conclusions Sexual behavior and outness may affect gonorrhea and chlamydia testing provision. Apart from clinicians, community based efforts may reduce stigma based barriers to testing.

The aim of this study was to explore the influence of a personal information agreement on customers’ information disclosure behavior. By integrating the existing privacy calculus theory, we sought to understand customer behavior in the context of encountering a personal information agreement and to provide insights into the efficacy of a company’s privacy policy. Our findings reveal that upon encountering a personal information agreement, customers perceive both a privacy retention period policy and privacy information sharing policy. We discovered that both policies significantly influence the perception of privacy benefits, but only the privacy information sharing policy impacts the perception of privacy risk. Furthermore, while privacy benefits were found to dictate information disclosure behavior in the context of a personal information agreement, perceptions of privacy risk did not significantly affect this behavior.

Background This study aimed to determine whether the disclosure of same-sex behavior to health care providers (HCPs) is associated with higher rates of prior human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) testing experience and greater awareness of immediate antiretroviral therapy (ART), Undetectable = Untransmittable (U=U), and pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) among men who have sex with men (MSM). Methods We conducted a cross-sectional survey among 689 adult males in Chengdu, China who self-reported having had anal intercourse with at least one man in the past 6 months. We measured same-sex behavior disclosure to three types of HCPs (hospital clinicians, community-based organization peer educators, and Center for Disease Control and Prevention public health specialists), and the awareness of immediate ART, U=U, and PrEP. Results Of the 689 enrolled participants, 31.4% had disclosed their same-sex behavior to some or all of the clinicians, 83.9% had done so to the peer educators, and 56.8% had done so to the public health specialists. Approximately four in five (82.1%) of the participants had ever been tested for HIV. The awareness rate was 84.8% for immediate ART, 20.2% for U=U, and 50.7% for PrEP. After controlling for significant background variables, same-sex behavior disclosure to clinicians was associated with greater awareness of PrEP (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.64; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.08–2.48), but similar findings were not reported regarding disclosure to peer educators or public health specialist. Same-sex behavior disclosure to any types of HCPs was not associated with HIV testing experience, and awareness of immediate ART or U=U. Conclusions The rates of same-sex behavior disclosure varied with different types of HCPs. Disclosure to clinicians was associated with greater awareness of PrEP, but not awareness of immediate ART or U=U.

ABSTRACT The so-called privacy paradox refers to individuals’ desire for privacy, which is subordinated to their willingness to trade it for the benefits of consuming a product or service, leading to a paradoxical situation. Although multiple theories attempt to explain this phenomenon, there is a lack of studies that integrate, at the construct level, the different theoretical approaches used to understand the privacy paradox. This study proposes a comprehensive view based on a literature review of 34 studies involving 14 theories that support the investigation of the privacy paradox. The review integrates studies addressing (1) the theoretical foundations of the privacy paradox, (2) the factors influencing the privacy paradox, and (3) the behavioral consequences that lead to the privacy paradox. We present an integrated theoretical framework at the construct level, allowing researchers in this field to propose new models derived from combinations of different theoretical approaches. RESUMEN La llamada paradoja de la privacidad se refiere a la situación en la que el deseo de privacidad de los individuos se subordina a su disposición a intercambiarla por los beneficios generados por el consumo de un producto o servicio, lo que lleva a una situación paradójica. Aunque múltiples teorías intentan explicar este fenómeno, faltan estudios que integren, a nivel de constructos, los diferentes enfoques teóricos utilizados para comprender la paradoja de la privacidad. Este estudio tiene como objetivo proponer una visión integral basada en una revisión de la literatura de 34 estudios que involucran 14 teorías que respaldan la investigación de la paradoja de la privacidad. La revisión integra estudios que abordan (1) los fundamentos teóricos de la paradoja de la privacidad, (2) los factores que influyen en la paradoja de la privacidad y (3) las consecuencias conductuales que llevan a la paradoja de la privacidad. Como resultado, se presenta un marco teórico integrado a nivel de constructos, que permitirá que los investigadores de este campo propongan nuevos modelos derivados de la combinación de diferentes enfoques teóricos. RESUMO O chamado paradoxo da privacidade está relacionado com o desejo de privacidade dos indivíduos subordinado a uma disposição de perdê-la por um ganho gerado pelo consumo de um produto ou serviço, levando à situação paradoxal. Apesar de haver múltiplas teorias que se propõem a explicar esse fenômeno, faltam estudos que integrem, ao nível dos construtos, as diferentes abordagens teóricas usadas para entendimento do paradoxo da privacidade. Este trabalho tem como objetivo propor uma visão abrangente, baseada na revisão da literatura de 34 estudos envolvendo 14 teorias usadas como suporte no estudo do paradoxo da privacidade. São integrados estudos que tratam (1) dos fundamentos teóricos do paradoxo da privacidade, (2) dos fatores que o influenciam e (3) das consequências comportamentais que levam ao paradoxo da privacidade. Como resultado, apresenta-se um quadro teórico integrado, ao nível dos construtos, que permitirá que os pesquisadores do tema proponham novos modelos derivados das combinações de diferentes abordagens teóricas.

We assessed if same-sex sexual behavior disclosure of index men who have sex with men (MSM) was related to number of HIV self-testing (HIVST) kits requested by index participants, and number of test results successfully uploaded by alters in a network-based HIVST intervention. Index participants are men who accessed and distributed HIVST kits and alters are index’s social contacts who received kits. We analyzed treatment arm data [N = 106, mean age = 27 (SD = 5.3)] of an intervention conducted among MSM in Guangzhou, China, May 2019—December 2019. Index MSM who disclosed sexual behavior to their family tended to request more kits [adjusted incidence rate ratio (aIRR) 1.42, 95% CI 1.06, 1.90, p < .05]. Index men who disclosed sexual behavior to their family (aIRR 2.47, 95% CI 1.17, 5.24, p < .05) tended to yield an increase in number of alter test results uploaded. Findings have implications for the development of network-based interventions for key populations.

Reputation-based cooperation is often observed in modern society. People gain several types of information by assessing others. Among these, the most important information is the actions of people and those of their recipients. However, almost all studies assume that people consider all of the information they receive. This assumption is extreme, and people engaging in reputation-based cooperation may not pay attention to some information, i.e., they may display selective inattention. We demonstrate that subjects’ decision-making in relation to cooperative action depends on the content of the information they receive about their recipients. Our results show that subjects either consider or ignore information depending on the content of that information. When their recipients had cooperated previously, subjects cooperated without considering the information they received. When the recipients had played before with those who had bad reputations, subjects did not use that information, regardless of whether it was disclosed proactively. In other cases, subjects considered information on both the previous actions of recipients and those of the recipients’ own recipients. We found that subjects did not always use the information to make decisions, although they willingly received information about their recipients. This supports the proposition that selective inattention occurs in reputation-based cooperation.

There are various regulatory mechanisms to coordinate vulnerability disclosure behaviors during crowdsourcing cybersecurity testing. However, in the case of unclear regulatory effectiveness, enterprises cannot obtain sufficient vulnerability information, third-party crowdsourcing cybersecurity testing platforms fail to provide trusted services, and the government lacks strong credibility. We have constructed a tripartite evolutionary game model to analyze the evolutionary process of the equilibrium of legal disclosure, active operation, strict regulation, and the paper reveals the impact of three regulatory mechanisms. We find that these participants' positive behaviors are in a stable state. Higher initial willingness accelerates the speed of reaching the evolutionary stability of the system, and this equilibrium is satisfied only if the governmental regulatory benefits are sufficiently high. Regarding the punishment mechanism, increased punishment for enterprises causes them to adopt positive behaviors faster, while the opposite occurs for platforms; increased punishment for platforms drives both participants to adopt positive behaviors faster. Concerning the subsidy mechanism, increased subsidy to enterprises causes them to adopt legal disclosure behaviors faster, while platforms remain unresponsive; increased subsidy to platforms motivates both players to choose their own positive behaviors. In terms of the collaborative disclosure mechanism, excessive collaborative costs reduce the platforms' willingness to operate actively, which decreases the enterprises' incentives to disclose vulnerability legally. These findings guide the government to establish suitable mechanisms to regulate the participants' behavior and promote the healthy development of the cybersecurity crowdsourcing industry.