More stories

  • in

    Study: Covid-19 has reduced diverse urban interactions

    The Covid-19 pandemic has reduced how often urban residents intersect with people from different income brackets, according to a new study led by MIT researchers.

    Examining the movement of people in four U.S. cities before and after the onset of the pandemic, the study found a 15 to 30 percent decrease in the number of visits residents were making to areas that are socioeconomically different than their own. In turn, this has reduced people’s opportunities to interact with others from varied social and economic spheres.

    “Income diversity of urban encounters decreased during the pandemic, and not just in the lockdown stages,” says Takahiro Yabe, a postdoc at the Media Lab and co-author of a newly published paper detailing the study’s results. “It decreased in the long term as well, after mobility patterns recovered.”

    Indeed, the study found a large immediate dropoff in urban movement in the spring of 2020, when new policies temporarily shuttered many types of institutions and businesses in the U.S. and much of the world due to the emergence of the deadly Covid-19 virus. But even after such restrictions were lifted and the overall amount of urban movement approached prepandemic levels, movement patterns within cities have narrowed; people now visit fewer places.

    “We see that changes like working from home, less exploration, more online shopping, all these behaviors add up,” says Esteban Moro, a research scientist at MIT’s Sociotechnical Systems Research Center (SSRC) and another of the paper’s co-authors. “Working from home is amazing and shopping online is great, but we are not seeing each other at the rates we were before.”

    The paper, “Behavioral changes during the Covid-19 pandemic decreased income diversity of urban encounters,” appears in Nature Communications. The co-authors are Yabe; Bernardo García Bulle Bueno, a doctoral candidate at MIT’s Institute for Data, Systems, and Society (IDSS); Xiaowen Dong, an associate professor at Oxford University; Alex Pentland, professor of media arts and sciences at MIT and the Toshiba Professor at the Media Lab; and Moro, who is also an associate professor at the University Carlos III of Madrid.

    A decline in exploration

    To conduct the study, the researchers examined anonymized cellphone data from 1 million users over a three-year period, starting in early 2019, with data focused on four U.S. cities: Boston, Dallas, Los Angeles, and Seattle. The researchers recorded visits to 433,000 specific “point of interest” locations in those cities, corroborated in part with records from Infogroup’s U.S. Business Database, an annual census of company information.  

    The researchers used U.S. Census Bureau data to categorize the socioeconomic status of the people in the study, placing everyone into one of four income quartiles, based on the average income of the census block (a small area) in which they live. The scholars made the same income-level assessment for every census block in the four cities, then recorded instances in which someone spent from 10 minutes to four hours in a census block other than their own, to see how often people visited areas in different income quartiles. 

    Ultimately, the researchers found that by late 2021, the amount of urban movement overall was returning to prepandemic levels, but the scope of places residents were visiting had become more restricted.

    Among other things, people made many fewer visits to museums, leisure venues, transport sites, and coffee shops. Visits to grocery stores remained fairly constant — but people tend not to leave their socioeconomic circles for grocery shopping.

    “Early in the pandemic, people reduced their mobility radius significantly,” Yabe says. “By late 2021, that decrease flattened out, and the average dwell time people spent at places other than work and home recovered to prepandemic levels. What’s different is that exploration substantially decreased, around 5 to 10 percent. We also see less visitation to fun places.” He adds: “Museums are the most diverse places you can find, parks — they took the biggest hit during the pandemic. Places that are [more] segregated, like grocery stores, did not.”

    Overall, Moro notes, “When we explore less, we go to places that are less diverse.”

    Different cities, same pattern

    Because the study encompassed four cities with different types of policies about reopening public sites and businesses during the pandemic, the researchers could also evaluate what impact public health policies had on urban movement. But even in these different settings, the same phenomenon emerged, with a narrower range of mobility occurring by late 2021.

    “Despite the substantial differences in how cities dealt with Covid-19, the decrease in diversity and the behavioral changes were surprisingly similar across the four cities,” Yabe observes.

    The researchers emphasize that these changes in urban movement can have long-term societal effects. Prior research has shown a significant association between a diversity of social connections and greater economic success for people in lower-income groups. And while some interactions between people in different income quartiles might be brief and transactional, the evidence suggests that, on aggregate, other more substantial connections have also been reduced. Additionally, the scholars note, the narrowing of experience can also weaken civic ties and valuable political connections.

    “It’s creating an urban fabric that is actually more brittle, in the sense that we are less exposed to other people,” Moro says. “We don’t get to know other people in the city, and that is very important for policies and public opinion. We need to convince people that new policies and laws would be fair. And the only way to do that is to know other people’s needs. If we don’t see them around the city, that will be impossible.”

    At the same time, Yabe adds, “I think there is a lot we can do from a policy standpoint to bring people back to places that used to be a lot more diverse.” The researchers are currently developing further studies related to cultural and public institutions, as well and transportation issues, to try to evaluate urban connectivity in additional detail.

    “The quantity of our mobility has recovered,” Yabe says. “The quality has really changed, and we’re more segregated as a result.” More

  • in

    Festival of Learning 2023 underscores importance of well-designed learning environments

    During its first in-person gathering since 2020, MIT’s Festival of Learning 2023 explored how the learning sciences can inform the Institute on how to best support students. Co-sponsored by MIT Open Learning and the Office of the Vice Chancellor (OVC), this annual event celebrates teaching and learning innovations with MIT instructors, students, and staff.

    Bror Saxberg SM ’85, PhD ’89, founder of LearningForge LLC and former chief learning officer at Kaplan, Inc., was invited as keynote speaker, with opening remarks by MIT Chancellor Melissa Nobles and Vice President for Open Learning Eric Grimson, and discussion moderated by Senior Associate Dean of Open Learning Christopher Capozzola. This year’s festival focused on how creating well-designed learning environments using learning engineering can increase learning success.

    Play video

    2023 Festival of Learning: Highlights

    Well-designed learning environments are key

    In his keynote speech “Learning Engineering: What We Know, What We Can Do,” Saxberg defined “learning engineering” as the practical application of learning sciences to real-world problems at scale. He said, “High levels can be reached by all learners, given access to well-designed instruction and motivation for enough practice opportunities.”

    Informed by decades of empirical evidence from the field of learning science, Saxberg’s own research, and insights from Kaplan, Inc., Saxberg finds that a hands-on strategy he calls “prepare, practice, perform” delivers better learning outcomes than a traditional “read, write, discuss” approach. Saxberg recommends educators devote at least 60 percent of learning time to hands-on approaches, such as producing, creating, and engaging. Only 20-30 percent of learning time should be spent in the more passive “knowledge acquisition” modes of listening and reading.

    “Here at MIT, a place that relies on data to make informed decisions, learning engineering can provide a framework for us to center in on the learner to identify the challenges associated with learning, and to apply the learning sciences in data-driven ways to improve instructional approaches,” said Nobles. During their opening remarks, Nobles and Grimson both emphasized how learning engineering at MIT is informed by the Institute’s commitment to educating the whole student, which encompasses student well-being and belonging in addition to academic rigor. “What lessons can we take away to change the way we think about education moving forward? This is a chance to iterate,” said Grimson.

    Well-designed learning environments are informed by understanding motivation, considering the connection between long-term and working memory, identifying the range of learners’ prior experience, grounding practice in authentic contexts (i.e., work environments), and using data-driven instructional approaches to iterate and improve.

    Play video

    2023 Festival of Learning: Keynote by Bror Saxberg

    Understand learner motivation

    Saxberg asserted that before developing course structures and teaching approaches known to encourage learning, educators must first examine learner motivation. Motivation doesn’t require enjoyment of the subject or task to spur engagement. Similar to how a well-designed physical training program can change your muscle cells, if a learner starts, persists, and exerts mental effort in a well-designed learning environment, they can change their neurons — they learn. Saxberg described four main barriers to learner motivation, and solutions for each:

    The learner doesn’t see the value of the lesson. Ways to address this include helping the learners find value; leveraging the learner’s expertise in another area to better understand the topic at hand; and making the activity itself enjoyable. “Finding value” could be as simple as explaining the practical applications of this knowledge in their future work in the field, or how this lesson prepares learners for their advanced level courses. 
    Self-efficacy for learners who don’t think they’re capable. Educators can point to parallel experiences with similar goals that students may have already achieved in another context. Alternatively, educators can share stories of professionals who have successfully transitioned from one area of expertise to another. 
    “Something” in the learner’s way, such as not having the time, space, or correct materials. This is an opportunity to demonstrate how a learner can use problem-solving skills to find a solution to their perceived problem. As with the barrier of self-efficacy, educators can assure learners that they are in control of the situation by sharing similar stories of those who’ve encountered the same problem and the solution they devised.
    The learner’s emotional state. This is no small barrier to motivation. If a learner is angry, depressed, scared, or grieving, it will be challenging for them to switch their mindset into learning mode. A wide array of emotions require a wide array of possible solutions, from structured conversation techniques to recommending professional help.
    Consider the cognitive load

    Saxberg has found that learning occurs when we use working memory to problem-solve, but our working memory can only process three to five verbal or conscious thoughts at a time. Long-term memory stores knowledge that can be accessed non-verbally and non-consciously, which is why experts appear to remember information effortlessly. Until a learner develops that expertise, extraneous information in a lesson will occupy space in their working memory, running the risk of distracting the learner from the desired learning outcome.

    To accommodate learners’ finite cognitive load, Saxberg suggested the solution of reevaluating which material is essential, then simplifying the exercise or removing unnecessary material accordingly. “That notion of, ‘what do we really need students to be able to do?’ helps you focus,” said Saxberg.

    Another solution is to leverage the knowledge, skills, and interests learners already bring to the course — these long-term memories can scaffold the new material. “What do you have in your head already, what do you love, what’s easy to draw from long-term memory? That would be the starting point for challenging new skills. It’s not the ending point because you want to use your new skills to then find out new things,” Saxberg said. Finally, consider how your course engages with the syllabi. Do you explain the reasoning behind the course structure? Do you show how the exercises or material will be applied to future courses or the field? Do you share best practices for engaging working memory and learning? By acknowledging and empathizing with the practical challenges that learners face, you can remove a barrier from their cognitive load.

    Ground practice in authentic contexts

    Saxberg stated that few experts read textbooks to learn new information — they discover what they need to know while working in the field, using those relevant facts in context. As such, students will have an easier time remembering facts if they’re practicing in relevant or similar environments to their future work.

    If students can practice classifying problems in real work contexts rather than theoretical practice problems, they can build a framework to classify what’s important. That helps students recognize the type of problem they’re trying to solve before trying to solve the problem itself. With enough hands-on practice and examples of how experts use processes and identify which principles are relevant, learners can holistically learn entire procedures. And that learning continues once learners graduate to the workforce: professionals often meet to exchange knowledge at conferences, charrettes, and other gatherings.

    Enhancing teaching at MIT

    The Festival of Learning furthers the Office of the Chancellor’s mission to advance academic innovation that will foster the growth of MIT students. The festival also aligns with the MIT Open Learning’s Residential Education team’s goal of making MIT education more effective and efficient. Throughout the year, their team offers continuous support to MIT faculty and instructors using digital technologies to augment and transform how they teach.

    “We are doubling down on our commitment to continuous growth in how we teach,” said Nobles. More

  • in

    Making each vote count

    Graduate student Jacob Jaffe wants to improve the administration of American elections. To do that, he is posing “questions in political science that we haven’t been asking enough,” he says, “and solving them with methods we haven’t been using enough.”

    Considerable research has been devoted to understanding “who votes, and what makes people vote or not vote,” says Jaffe. He is training his attention on questions of a different nature: Does providing practical information to voters about how to cast their ballots change how they will vote? Is it possible to increase the accuracy of vote-counting, on a state-by-state and even precinct-by-precinct basis? How do voters experience polling places? These problems form the core of his dissertation.

    Taking advantage of the resources at the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, where he serves as a researcher, Jaffe conducts novel field experiments to gather highly detailed information on local, state, and federal elections, and analyzes this trove with advanced statistical techniques. Whether investigating the probability of miscounts in voting, or the possibility of changing a voter’s mode of voting, Jaffe intends to strengthen the scaffolding that supports representative government. “Elections are both theoretically and normatively important; they’re the basis of our belief in the moral rightness of the state to do the things the state does,” he says.

    Click this link

    For one of his keystone projects, Jaffe seized a unique opportunity to run a big field experiment. In summer 2020, at the height of the Covid-19 pandemic, he emailed 80,000 Floridians instructions on how to vote in an upcoming primary by mail. His email contained a link enabling recipients to fill out two simple questions to receive a ballot. “I wanted to learn if this was an effective method for getting people to vote by mail, and I proved it is, statistically,” he says. “This is important to know because if elections are held in times when we might need people to vote nonlocally or vote using one method over another — if they’re displaced by a hurricane or another emergency, for instance — I learned that we can effect a new vote mode practically and quickly.”

    One of Jaffe’s insights from this experiment is that “people do read their voting-related emails, but the content of the email has to be something they can act on proximately,” he says. “A message reminding them to vote two weeks from now is not so helpful.” The lower the burden on an individual to participate in voting, whether due to proximity to a polling site or instructions on how to receive and cast a ballot, the greater the likelihood of that person engaging in the election.

    “If we want people to vote by mail, we need to reduce the informational cost so it’s easier for voters to understand how the system works,” he says.

    Another significant research thrust for Jaffe involves scrutinizing accuracy in vote counting, using instances of recounts in presidential elections. Ensuring each vote counts, he says, “is one of the most fundamental questions in democracy,” he says.

    With access to 20 elections in 2020, Jaffe is comparing original vote totals for each candidate to the recounted, correct tally, on a precinct-level basis. “Using original combinatorial techniques, I can estimate the probability of miscounting ballots,” he says. The ultimate goal is to generate a granular picture of the efficacy of election administration across the country.

    “It varies a lot by state, and most states do a good job,” he says. States that take their time in counting perform better. “There’s a phenomenon where some towns race to get results in as quickly as possible, and this affects their accuracy.”

    In spite of the bright spots, Jaffe sees chronic underfunding of American elections. “We need to give local administrators the resources, the time and money to fund employees to do their jobs,” he says. The worse the situation is, “the more likely that elections will be called wrong, with no one knowing.” Jaffe believes that his analysis can offer states useful information for improving election administration. “Determining how good a place is historically at counting ballots can help determine the likelihood of needing costly recounts in future elections,” he says.

    The ballot box and beyond

    It didn’t take Jaffe long to decide on a life dedicated to studying politics. Part of a Boston-area family who, he says, “liked discussing what was going on in the world,” he had his own subscriptions to Time magazine at age 9, and to The Economist in middle school. During high school, he volunteered for then-Massachusetts Representative Barney Frank and Senator John Kerry, working on constituent services. At Rice University, he interned all four years with political scientist Robert M. Stein, an expert on voting and elections. With Stein’s help, Jaffe landed a position the summer before his senior year with the Department of Justice (DOJ), researching voting rights cases.

    “The experience was fascinating, and the work felt super important,” says Jaffe. His portfolio involved determining whether legal challenges to particular elections met the statistical standard for racial gerrymandering. “I had to answer hard quantitative questions about the relationship between race and voting in an area, and whether minority candidates were systematically prevented from winning,” he says.

    But while Jaffe cared a lot about this work, he didn’t feel adequately challenged. “As a 21-year-old at DOJ, I learned that I could address problems in the world using statistics,” he says. “But I felt I could have a greater impact addressing tougher questions outside of voting rights.”

    Jaffe was drawn to political science at MIT, and specifically to the research of Charles Stewart III, the Kenan Sahin Distinguished Professor of Political Science, director of the MIT Election Lab, and head of Jaffe’s thesis committee. It wasn’t just the opportunity to plumb the lab’s singular repository of voting data that attracted Jaffe, but its commitment to making every vote count. For Jaffe, this was a call to arms to investigate the many, and sometimes quotidian, obstacles, between citizens and ballot boxes.

    To this end, he has been analyzing, with the help of mathematical methods from queuing theory, why some elections involve wait lines of six hours and longer at polling sites. “We know that simpler ballots mean people move don’t get stuck in these lines, where they might potentially give up before voting,” he says. “Looking at the content of ballots and the interval between voter check-in and check-out, I learned that adding races, rather than candidates, to a ballot, means that people take more time completing ballots, leading to interminable lines.”

    A key takeaway from his ensemble of studies is that “while it’s relatively rare that elections are bad, we shouldn’t think that we’re good to go,” he says. “Instead, we need to be asking under what conditions do things get bad, and how can we make them better.” More

  • in

    Systems scientists find clues to why false news snowballs on social media

    The spread of misinformation on social media is a pressing societal problem that tech companies and policymakers continue to grapple with, yet those who study this issue still don’t have a deep understanding of why and how false news spreads.

    To shed some light on this murky topic, researchers at MIT developed a theoretical model of a Twitter-like social network to study how news is shared and explore situations where a non-credible news item will spread more widely than the truth. Agents in the model are driven by a desire to persuade others to take on their point of view: The key assumption in the model is that people bother to share something with their followers if they think it is persuasive and likely to move others closer to their mindset. Otherwise they won’t share.

    The researchers found that in such a setting, when a network is highly connected or the views of its members are sharply polarized, news that is likely to be false will spread more widely and travel deeper into the network than news with higher credibility.

    This theoretical work could inform empirical studies of the relationship between news credibility and the size of its spread, which might help social media companies adapt networks to limit the spread of false information.

    “We show that, even if people are rational in how they decide to share the news, this could still lead to the amplification of information with low credibility. With this persuasion motive, no matter how extreme my beliefs are — given that the more extreme they are the more I gain by moving others’ opinions — there is always someone who would amplify [the information],” says senior author Ali Jadbabaie, professor and head of the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering and a core faculty member of the Institute for Data, Systems, and Society (IDSS) and a principal investigator in the Laboratory for Information and Decision Systems (LIDS).

    Joining Jadbabaie on the paper are first author Chin-Chia Hsu, a graduate student in the Social and Engineering Systems program in IDSS, and Amir Ajorlou, a LIDS research scientist. The research will be presented this week at the IEEE Conference on Decision and Control.

    Pondering persuasion

    This research draws on a 2018 study by Sinan Aral, the David Austin Professor of Management at the MIT Sloan School of Management; Deb Roy, an associate professor of media arts and sciences at the Media Lab; and former postdoc Soroush Vosoughi (now an assistant professor of computer science at Dartmouth University). Their empirical study of data from Twitter found that false news spreads wider, faster, and deeper than real news.

    Jadbabaie and his collaborators wanted to drill down on why this occurs.

    They hypothesized that persuasion might be a strong motive for sharing news — perhaps agents in the network want to persuade others to take on their point of view — and decided to build a theoretical model that would let them explore this possibility.

    In their model, agents have some prior belief about a policy, and their goal is to persuade followers to move their beliefs closer to the agent’s side of the spectrum.

    A news item is initially released to a small, random subgroup of agents, which must decide whether to share this news with their followers. An agent weighs the newsworthiness of the item and its credibility, and updates its belief based on how surprising or convincing the news is. 

    “They will make a cost-benefit analysis to see if, on average, this piece of news will move people closer to what they think or move them away. And we include a nominal cost for sharing. For instance, taking some action, if you are scrolling on social media, you have to stop to do that. Think of that as a cost. Or a reputation cost might come if I share something that is embarrassing. Everyone has this cost, so the more extreme and the more interesting the news is, the more you want to share it,” Jadbabaie says.

    If the news affirms the agent’s perspective and has persuasive power that outweighs the nominal cost, the agent will always share the news. But if an agent thinks the news item is something others may have already seen, the agent is disincentivized to share it.

    Since an agent’s willingness to share news is a product of its perspective and how persuasive the news is, the more extreme an agent’s perspective or the more surprising the news, the more likely the agent will share it.

    The researchers used this model to study how information spreads during a news cascade, which is an unbroken sharing chain that rapidly permeates the network.

    Connectivity and polarization

    The team found that when a network has high connectivity and the news is surprising, the credibility threshold for starting a news cascade is lower. High connectivity means that there are multiple connections between many users in the network.

    Likewise, when the network is largely polarized, there are plenty of agents with extreme views who want to share the news item, starting a news cascade. In both these instances, news with low credibility creates the largest cascades.

    “For any piece of news, there is a natural network speed limit, a range of connectivity, that facilitates good transmission of information where the size of the cascade is maximized by true news. But if you exceed that speed limit, you will get into situations where inaccurate news or news with low credibility has a larger cascade size,” Jadbabaie says.

    If the views of users in the network become more diverse, it is less likely that a poorly credible piece of news will spread more widely than the truth.

    Jadbabaie and his colleagues designed the agents in the network to behave rationally, so the model would better capture actions real humans might take if they want to persuade others.

    “Someone might say that is not why people share, and that is valid. Why people do certain things is a subject of intense debate in cognitive science, social psychology, neuroscience, economics, and political science,” he says. “Depending on your assumptions, you end up getting different results. But I feel like this assumption of persuasion being the motive is a natural assumption.”

    Their model also shows how costs can be manipulated to reduce the spread of false information. Agents make a cost-benefit analysis and won’t share news if the cost to do so outweighs the benefit of sharing.

    “We don’t make any policy prescriptions, but one thing this work suggests is that, perhaps, having some cost associated with sharing news is not a bad idea. The reason you get lots of these cascades is because the cost of sharing the news is actually very low,” he says.

    This work was supported by an Army Research Office Multidisciplinary University Research Initiative grant and a Vannevar Bush Fellowship from the Office of the Secretary of Defense. More

  • in

    New integrative computational neuroscience center established at MIT’s McGovern Institute

    With the tools of modern neuroscience, researchers can peer into the brain with unprecedented accuracy. Recording devices listen in on the electrical conversations between neurons, picking up the voices of hundreds of cells at a time. Genetic tools allow us to focus on specific types of neurons based on their molecular signatures. Microscopes zoom in to illuminate the brain’s circuitry, capturing thousands of images of elaborately branched dendrites. Functional MRIs detect changes in blood flow to map activity within a person’s brain, generating a complete picture by compiling hundreds of scans.

    This deluge of data provides insights into brain function and dynamics at different levels — molecules, cells, circuits, and behavior — but the insights remain compartmentalized in separate research silos for each level. An innovative new center at MIT’s McGovern Institute for Brain Research aims to leverage them into powerful revelations of the brain’s inner workings.

    The K. Lisa Yang Integrative Computational Neuroscience (ICoN) Center will create advanced mathematical models and computational tools to synthesize the deluge of data across scales and advance our understanding of the brain and mental health.

    The center, funded by a $24 million donation from philanthropist Lisa Yang and led by McGovern Institute Associate Investigator Ila Fiete, will take a collaborative approach to computational neuroscience, integrating cutting-edge modeling techniques and data from MIT labs to explain brain function at every level, from the molecular to the behavioral.

    “Our goal is that sophisticated, truly integrated computational models of the brain will make it possible to identify how ‘control knobs’ such as genes, proteins, chemicals, and environment drive thoughts and behavior, and to make inroads toward urgent unmet needs in understanding and treating brain disorders,” says Fiete, who is also a brain and cognitive sciences professor at MIT.

    “Driven by technologies that generate massive amounts of data, we are entering a new era of translational neuroscience research,” says Yang, whose philanthropic investment in MIT research now exceeds $130 million. “I am confident that the multidisciplinary expertise convened by the ICoN center will revolutionize how we synthesize this data and ultimately understand the brain in health and disease.”

    Connecting the data

    It is impossible to separate the molecules in the brain from their effects on behavior — although those aspects of neuroscience have traditionally been studied independently, by researchers with vastly different expertise. The ICoN Center will eliminate the divides, bringing together neuroscientists and software engineers to deal with all types of data about the brain.

    “The center’s highly collaborative structure, which is essential for unifying multiple levels of understanding, will enable us to recruit talented young scientists eager to revolutionize the field of computational neuroscience,” says Robert Desimone, director of the McGovern Institute. “It is our hope that the ICoN Center’s unique research environment will truly demonstrate a new academic research structure that catalyzes bold, creative research.”

    To foster interdisciplinary collaboration, every postdoc and engineer at the center will work with multiple faculty mentors. In order to attract young scientists and engineers to the field of computational neuroscience, the center will also provide four graduate fellowships to MIT students each year in perpetuity. Interacting closely with three scientific cores, engineers and fellows will develop computational models and technologies for analyzing molecular data, neural circuits, and behavior, such as tools to identify patterns in neural recordings or automate the analysis of human behavior to aid psychiatric diagnoses. These technologies and models will be instrumental in synthesizing data into knowledge and understanding.

    Center priorities

    In its first five years, the ICoN Center will prioritize four areas of investigation: episodic memory and exploration, including functions like navigation and spatial memory; complex or stereotypical behavior, such as the perseverative behaviors associated with autism and obsessive-compulsive disorder; cognition and attention; and sleep. Models of complex behavior will be created in collaboration with clinicians and researchers at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia.

    The goal, Fiete says, is to model the neuronal interactions that underlie these functions so that researchers can predict what will happen when something changes — when certain neurons become more active or when a genetic mutation is introduced, for example. When paired with experimental data from MIT labs, the center’s models will help explain not just how these circuits work, but also how they are altered by genes, the environment, aging, and disease. These focus areas encompass circuits and behaviors often affected by psychiatric disorders and neurodegeneration, and models will give researchers new opportunities to explore their origins and potential treatment strategies.

    “Lisa Yang is focused on helping the scientific community realize its goals in translational research,” says Nergis Mavalvala, dean of the School of Science and the Curtis and Kathleen Marble Professor of Astrophysics. “With her generous support, we can accelerate the pace of research by connecting the data to the delivery of tangible results.” More

  • in

    Lockdowns reveal inequities in opportunities for walking activities

    Lockdowns saved lives during the global SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. But as much as they have slowed the spread of Covid-19, there have been some unintended consequences.

    New MIT research shows that lockdowns in 10 metropolitan areas throughout the United States led to a marked reduction in walking. These decreases were mostly seen among residents living in lower-income areas of the city, effectively reducing access to physical activity for minorities and people suffering from illnesses such as obesity and diabetes.

    “Walking is the cheapest, most accessible physical exercise that you can do,” says Esteban Moro, visiting research scientist in the MIT Connection Science Group and senior author on the Nature Communications paper published on June 16. “Places in which people have lower incomes, less park access, and more obesity prevalence were more affected by this walking reduction — which you can think of as another pandemic, the lack of access to affordable exercise.”

    The research focused on recreational versus utilitarian walking done by residents in the U.S. cities of New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Boston, Miami, Dallas, San Francisco, Seattle, Philadelphia, and Washington D.C. (Utilitarian walking is defined as having a goal; for example, walking to the store or to public transportation. Recreational walking is a walk meant for leisure or exercise.)

    Comparing cellphone data from February 2020 to different time points throughout 2020 lockdowns, the researchers saw an average 70 percent decrease in the number of walks — which remained down by about 18 percent after loosened restrictions — a 50 percent decrease in distance walked, and a 72 percent decrease in utilitarian walking — which remained down by 39 percent even after restrictions were lifted.

    On their face, these findings may not be surprising. When people couldn’t leave their homes, they walked less. But digging deeper into the data yields troubling insights. For example, people in lower-income regions are more likely to rely on public transportation. Lockdowns cut back on those services, meaning fewer people walking to trains and buses.

    Another statistic showed that people in higher-income areas reduced their number of utilitarian walks but were able to replace some of the lost movement with recreational walks around their neighborhoods or in nearby parks.

    “People in higher-income areas generally not only have a park nearby, but also have jobs that give them a degree of flexibility. Jobs that permit them to take a break and walk,” says Moro. “People in the low-income regions often don’t have the ability, the opportunity or even the facilities to actually do this.”

    How it was done

    The researchers used de-identified mobile data obtained through a partnership within the company Cuebiq’s Data for Good COVID-19 Collaborative program. The completely anonymized dataset consisted of GPS locations gathered from smartphone accelerometers from users who opted into the program. Moro and his collaborators took these data and, using specifically designed algorithms, determined when people walked, for how long, and for what purpose. They compared this information from before the pandemic, at different points throughout lockdown, and at a point when most restrictions had been eased. They matched the GPS-identified locations of the smartphones with census data to understand income level and other demographics.

    To make sure their dataset was robust, they only used information from areas that could reasonably be considered pedestrian. The researchers also acknowledge that the dataset may be incomplete, considering people may have occasionally walked without their phones on them.

    Leisure versus utilitarian walks were separated according to distance and/or destination. Utilitarian walks are usually shorter and involve stops at destinations other than the starting point. Leisure walks are longer and usually happen closer to home or in dedicated outdoor spaces.

    For example, many of the walks recorded pre-Covid-19 were short and occurred at around 7 a.m. and between 3 and 5 p.m., which would indicate a walking commute. These bouts of walking were replaced on weekends by short walks around noon.

    The key takeaway is that most walking in cities occurs with the goal of getting to a place. If people don’t have the opportunity to walk to places they need to go, they will reduce their walking activity overall. But when provided opportunity and access, people can supplement utilitarian activity with leisure walking.

    What can be done about it

    Taking into account the public health implications of physical inactivity, the authors argue a reduction in access to walking should be considered a second pandemic and be addressed with the same rigor as the Covid-19 pandemic.

    They suggest several tactical urbanization strategies (defined as non-permanent but easily accessible measures) to increase safety and appeal for both utilitarian and recreational walkers. Many of these have already been implemented in various cities around the world to ease economic and other hardships of the pandemic. Sections of city streets have been closed off to cars on weekends or other non-busy times to allow for pedestrian walking areas. Restaurants have been given curb space to allow for outdoor dining.

    “But most of these pop-up pedestrian areas happen in downtown, where people are high-income and have easier access to more walking opportunities,” notes Moro.

    The same attention needs to be paid to lower-income areas, the researchers argue. This study’s data showed that people explored their own neighborhoods in a recreational way more during lockdown than pre-pandemic. Such wanderings, the researcher say, should be encouraged by making any large, multi-lane intersections safer to cross for the elderly, sick, or those with young children. And local parks, usually seen as places for running laps, should be made more attractive destinations by adding amenities like water fountains, shaded pavilions, and hygiene and sanitation spaces.

    This study was unique in that its data came straight from mobile devices, rather than being self-reported in surveys. This more reliable method of tracking made this study more data-driven than other, similar efforts. And the geotagged data allowed the researchers to dig into socioeconomic trends associated with the findings.

    This is the team’s first analysis of physical activity during and just after lockdown. They hope to use lessons learned from this and planned follow-ups to encourage more permanent adoption of pedestrian-friendly pandemic-era changes.

    The Connection Science Group, co-led by faculty member Alex “Sandy” Pentland — who, along with Moro was a co-author on the paper along with six others from the UK, Brazil, and Australia — is part of the MIT Sociotechnical Systems Research Center within the MIT Institute for Data, Systems, and Society. The collaborative research exemplified in this study is core to the mission of the SSRC; in pairing computer science with public health, the group not only observes trends but also contextualizes data and use them to make improvements for everyone.

    “SSRC merges both the social and technological components of the research,” says Moro. “We’re not only building an analysis, but going beyond that to propose new policies and interventions to change what we are seeing for the better.” More