cfp Special issue: Int. Journal of Social Robotics "Towards Ethical Deception in HRI"

Dear colleagues, 

We would like to invite you to submit your works at the special issue on "Towards Ethical Deception in HRI" in International Journal of Social Robotics whose submission deadline is 19 December 2026. 

The special issue explores the design and ethical implications of robot deception in human–robot interaction, emphasising autonomy, well-being, and the protection of vulnerable populations. 

Read below further information, and please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions. 

Kind regards,
Alessandra Rossi 

Alessandra Rossi, PhD 
Assistant Professor Fellow of the Higher Education Academy Department of Electrical Engineering and Information Technologies - D.I.E.T.I. 
University of Naples Federico II Via Claudio, 21, 80125 - Naples, Italy 

w-page: https://alessandrarossi.net 
e-mail address: alessandra.rossi @ unina.it 
e-mail address: a.rossi @ herts.ac.uk

This Topical Collection focuses on deception in human-robot interaction and its ethical implications. In particular, robot deception is a complex yet potentially beneficial strategy. Intentional behaviours such as white lies or deliberate errors can foster trust, reduce distress, and improve therapeutic or educational outcomes. Robots may strategically omit information to maintain psychological stability or simulate imperfections to appear more relatable. While deception in human–robot interaction remains ethically controversial, its applications can enhance empathy, engagement, and learning. Ultimately, the capacity for controlled, prosocial deception highlights the need to reconsider moral frameworks governing social robotics, emphasizing the potential for nuanced, emotionally adaptive interactions.

This collection aims at exploring a design-centred and ethical-centred development of robotic deceptive behaviours for a successful human-robot interaction that, at the same time, is ethically acceptable and respect the autonomy and well-being of population, specially vulnerable individuals such as older people, patients and children. This Topical Collection is open to a broad audience from academia and industry researching social robotics, robot ethics, cognitive science, psychology, and philosophy of technology. It aims to attract an interdisciplinary audience that includes academics, industry researchers, designers, and policy-makers interested in exploring the integration of deceptive techniques in designed-centred and ethics-centred HRI. By collecting works addressing disciplinary and methodological boundaries, this collection seeks to promote a shared understanding of how social robots might responsibly employ complex behavioural strategies in human-centred contexts, such as education, healthcare and service.

Submission guidelines

All papers must be prepared in accordance with the Submission Guidelines. Articles for this Topical Collection should be submitted via our submission system, Editorial Manager. During the submission process you will be asked whether you are submitting to a Collection, please select "Towards Ethical Deception in HRI" from the dropdown menu.

Submitted papers should present original, unpublished work, relevant to one of the topics of the Topical Collection. All papers will be evaluated on the basis of relevance, significance of contribution, technical quality, scholarship, and quality of presentation by at least two reviewers. It is the policy of the journal that no submission, or substantially overlapping submission, be published or be under review at another journal or conference at any time during the review process. Final decisions on all papers are made by the Editors-in-Chief.

My source: https://www.bcs-sgai.org/?section=server

Philosophical Counselling Reading Group [and Hodges' model]

The discovery of a reading group on philosophical counselling (PC), through University of Liverpool, continues to prove helpful; to utilise professional experience, that included counselling, family therapy, cognitive therapy in psychoses, and practical experience as a mental health nurse (in-patient and community). There is overlap with Hodges' model, but it's fascinating and rewarding to listen and learn from practitioners of PC. As noted before, I was aware of PC through two popular philosophy magazines. This time around we read:

Ran Lahav, “Philosophical Counseling and Self-Transformation,” in Philosophy, Counseling, and Psychotherapy, eds. Elliot D. Cohen & S. Samuel Zinaich, Jr. (Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2013), 82.

Abstract

This paper presents my approach to philosophical counseling, which is geared towards self-transformation, and is inspired by important thinkers throughout the history of Western philosophy whom I call transformational thinkers. I take from these thinkers the realization that our daily life is normally confined to rigid and superficial attitudes towards ourselves and our world. This is because individuals’ everyday attitudes are based on limited understandings of life, which form what I call the person’s perimeter, or perimetral worldview. The goal of philosophical counseling, as I see it, is to help counselees transcend their constricted perimetral worldview, or in the language of Plato – to realize that they are imprisoned in a “cave,” and then to step out of it towards a fuller reality. A case study is presented to illustrate the two main stages of the counseling process. 

I know there is the (biblical) phrase 'Seek and you will find'; but there is also the notion of seeing only what you seek, and missing other content - contexts. This is marked in beliefs and the development of delusional ideas. 

Of interest to me, Lahav discusses (as indicated above) a person’s perimeter, or perimetral worldview. 

We still hear how difficult it is for people to access help. I wondered (again) about referral pathways for PC? The nature of the person's problems that prompts them to seek help? Lahav acknowledges the complexity here. Speaking of 'prompt', of course now there is AI in the mix. Lahav points out how PC does not quite have the foundation and hence theoretical impetus (and rigour?) that Freud provided to psychoanalysis and psychotherapy. 

PC is, however, to some extent a broad field: '... philosophical practice has come to include several different formats in which it is practiced: one-time workshops for the general public, philosophical retreats, long-term self-reflection groups, the philosophical café, and of course philosophical counseling'. 

I wonder if philosophical counsellor's could have a role, post AI / agentic ai interventions. This could provide a step-down assurance, and be rolled into 'treatment / intervention programmes'. This could help retain the humanistic element of duty of care, underscore the person_al in care architectures/systems and provide a step-down - just in-case AI has missed, or upset something? The acknowledged strength of AI in not being subjective is balanced. Although evidence also points to misogynistic responses derived through what can be biased, and prejudiced learning sources: thus a reflection of 'society'.

In the introduction, more encouragement with reference to situated, a general map, and basic - fundamental aspects. There are (at least) two domains: 'the domain of philosophical discourse and the domain of everyday life and predicaments'. 

Hodges' model was created to facilitate the FIRST approach in PC, the Critical Thinking Approach, with an associated subtype of Problem-Solving Approach. 

It was also designed to help with the theory-practice gap. Lahav describes this in the how and what of philosophy and PC itself. I wondered to what extent if the approach of PC 'leave out the more important “what” of great philosophies.' then would a counselee be denied avenues to learning, as we may be drawn to specific philosophical schools of thought, and crucially reasoning?

The SECOND approach to PC is the Edification Approach. The author has adopted this second approach in practice.

Guess what? Yes, you've got it. Hodges' model can actually close a circle here. Or, more accurately help sustain the reflective, reflexive, recursive ... reasoning loop as needed. Another objective of Hodges' model is to produce reflective practitioners, critical thinkers and lifelong learners.

A take-away for me is the 'perimeter and the perimetral worldview'. A search for 'perimeter' here on W2tQ is null.^ I'm also wondering about transformation (in the title) and throughout the paper.

There may be an example here were a domain of Hodges' model can itself reflect the model, as in the Intra- Interpersonal domain below.

Lahav employs a case study to illustrate his thought and practice. The discussion really helped improve my reading and understanding of this.

individual

|
INTERPERSONAL : SCIENCES             

humanistic ------------------------------- mechanistic

SOCIOLOGY : POLITICAL   

|

group

Psychology   | Philosophy(-isms) ________________________________ Psycho-Social|  Psychotherapies	basic - fundamental general map
case study	referral pathways

^'Peripheral' does feature in posts.

Dear Editorial Office,

Dear Dr. Jones,

My name is Editorial Office, and I am writing on behalf of the selected journal. I came across your article, "A Conceptual Mapping Exercise of Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards in Residential & Community Care Using Hodges' Model and Threshold Concepts". Its focus on deprivation of liberty safeguards, Hodges' model, older adults caught our attention. I would like to invite you to consider a new and unpublished contribution to the selected journal.

For this invited contribution, we are pleased to offer a Full APC Waiver. Invited manuscripts receive priority editorial handling, and we aim to provide an initial editorial decision within one week. This invitation does not imply acceptance, and editorial standards remain unchanged.

If you are interested, a working title or short abstract is enough for an initial discussion. If your current work is not closely aligned with this journal, you are also welcome to share your present research topic and we can check whether another journal in our portfolio may be more suitable.

I would be glad to answer any questions and look forward to hearing from you.

Best regards,
Editorial Office
the selected journal

Dear Editorial Office,

Re. 'the selected journal: Invited Contribution – Full APC Waiver'

Thank you for your communication and recognition of my recent paper.

Unfortunately you have not specified the 'selected journal'. Without this detail it is difficult to proceed at all, or ascertain what benefit is provided by the 'full APC waiver'. 

I am more troubled, however by your name. Is it really 'Editorial Office'?

Again the specific journal matters here. If it is materials science, chemistry, or quantum physics or related this is (slightly?) less of a problem. Otherwise, I do worry that with Hodges' model being person-centred your being de-personalised does not sit very well with the purposes and values of Hodges' model.

It is however reassuring to learn that I should not take your invitation to suggest acceptance, and that accordingly your editorial standards remain intact - especially in these times.

Again, even if I were interested, I am at a loss to provide either a working title, or abstract.

I do hope you understand my difficulty? 

Although perhaps I ask too much.

Can it be - this IS in fact the journal?

'The Selected Journal'?

Yours Faithfully,

Mr^ P Jones

^'Conceptual Surgeon' 4th class

(and not sent.) 

Disciplines in Disarray - Scope of Practice, Disciplinary boundaries

To be in a state of disarray, is to be disarmed, without access to resources, or at least having an impaired ability to organise strategically for reasons of defence, disputation or argument. Constructive debate will be hard to achieve and so the confusion continues.

Prior to 2013 ideas for a paper with a would-be co-author began. Early that year there were 5000 words. There's probably mention of (another!) project on these pages – somewhere/when? The focus was using Hodges' model to explore 'scope of practice' in nursing. As the conceptual gift that keeps giving, Hodges' model can encompass all health disciplines, curricula, and professions, informal caring and social care too.

This post is prompt-ed (human ‘intelligence’ needs a nudge too) by ‘discussion’ on what was twitter, and currently on ‘X’. So in turn I can reflect on how relevant this paper would be today.

I still have that draft of over 5000 words. It is now woefully out-of-date. Out-of-date? Well the available job postings across the health and care sectors, have always changed. If you scan the paper copies of  Nursing Times, Nursing Standard, Nursing Mirror (anyone?) and the BMJ, The Lancet, Health Service Journal over three-four decades the evidence is clear. Then try the e-media, (and with it AI!)?

Now, for several years the impacts of  policy and change in advanced nursing practice, plus associate roles, that have also been applied in medical training and education are coming home to roost. Depending on your corner, and position in the debate there's a position called 'Noctor' (Vaughan and Kar, 2026).

I find it regrettable that consultants and 'senior' nurses have taken corners, as policy results in grossly negative examples with potentially safety consequences. There has always been a 'distance' to be bridged between health disciplines. In the past any sense of competition was usually, and so constructively patient-centred - grounded in the delivery and quality of care. The contest was tempered through mutual respect and dignity, and recognition of respective roles, knowledge, abilities and contribution to what is (and remains?) the multidisciplinary team?

Now with technology and AI in the mix, maintaining goodwill, common-sense and keeping the patient, public and future generations in sight will need a degree of diplomacy as yet not called-upon.

This made me think of the unions in the 1970s and more recent examples of work-to-rule. 

As health professionals argue between themselves, what is the cost of distraction?

Yes, that paper using Hodges' model on 'scope of practice (and theory!)' would be timely now.
In fact, it is urgently needed.

Vaughan L, Kar P. Vexatious complaints are being weaponised to discourage debate BMJ 2026; 394 :e100697 doi:10.1136/bmj-2026-100697 

Previously: 'scope' : 'publications'

Workshop: 'Under Pressure: Character, Certainty, Conspiracy'

How people change (or fail to) under pressure, false certainty and misinformation

Institute for Ethics & Society Workshop - Thursday 3 September 2026

10:00 am – 4:30 pm (AEST)

In an age of outrage, algorithms and information overload, how do we become people of resilient character, humble conviction and wise discernment? Drawing on several funded research projects in Europe and Australia, this workshop explores how pressure exposes the heart and yet shapes the self, how self-righteousness quietly corrupts our capacity for knowledge and understanding of self and others, and how conspiracy theories and AI-generated “slopaganda” shape the way we see the world.

The IES is pleased to host this event on the occasion of Laura Candiotto’s visit to Sydney. Laura is Associate Professor of Moral Philosophy (Universities of Cagliari and Pardubice). She currently leads two research projects, including ‘Vicious Epistemic Cultures’ on the ethics of knowledge with a specific focus on emotional friction in revision responsibility, funded by the Czech Science Foundation. Laura is currently working on a monograph, Emotional Friction, and a co-edited collection entitled Vice Epistemology and the Philosophy of Emotions (Routledge).

 

SPEAKERS

Laura Candiotto (Cagliari and Pardubice) ‘Character revision under duress’

 

John Lippitt (Notre Dame IES and Pardubice) ‘Failures of receptivity: self-righteousness as a stealthy vice’

 

Adam Piovarchy (Notre Dame IES) ‘Conspiracy theories are Infohazards’

 

Mark Alfano (Macquarie) ‘Slopaganda’

Event poster: https://url.au.m.mimecastprotect.com/s/NdGNCq712YtRgVKVFXhKphE8bFg?domain=notredame.edu.au

 

Location:

The University of Notre Dame Australia,

NDS23/102 (Wilcox Mofflin Building)

46-52 Mountain Street Ultimo, NSW, 2007

 

Or online via Teams

For enquiries, Teams link and to RSVP:

Professor John Lippitt (john.lippitt AT nd.edu.au)

My source: Philos-L "The Liverpool List" is run by the Department of Philosophy, University of Liverpool https://www.liverpool.ac.uk/philosophy/philos-l/ Messages to the list are archived at http://listserv.liv.ac.uk/archives/philos-l.html. Recent posts can also be read in a Facebook group: https://www.facebook.com/PhilosL/ Follow the list on Twitter @PhilosL. Follow the Department of Philosophy @LiverpoolPhilos

Invitation to Register: AI for Health BCS London - 6 Nov 2026

Invitation to Register

AI for Health 2026
Friday 6 November 2026

British Computer Society London Office (near Moorgate Underground)

According to the World Health Organization (WHO) prioritising AI for health is crucial. The WHO also highlights that a healthy diet protects you against many chronic noncommunicable diseases, such as heart disease, diabetes and cancer. Quantum computing is gathering an enormous interest as a new paradigm of computing  (see Quantum for Good at https://quantumforgood.eu/), which is already making an impact across industries like health and life sciences (agriculture, food and health). Classical (or current) AI relies in classical computers based on binary bits (zeros and ones), while quantum AI relies in quantum computers based on quantum bits (qubits). Quantum AI could dramatically accelerate research that requires processing vast amounts of data, contributing to human health by accelerating drug discovery or enabling earlier diagnostics. Quantum AI could be also instrumental in identifying early signs of crop diseases or optimising water use.

AI for Health 2026 will have a morning session about AI for health, and an afternoon session about quantum technologies for health and food, including an introduction to quantum computing. Before lunch break, there will be a hands-on tutorial on low-code AI agents for health, farming, and food. Come along to AI for Health 2026 if you are interested in cutting-edge AI for Health, using latest technologies with a promise of high impact.

A full-day face-to-face event organised by the BCS SGAI with the following agenda:

09.30-10.00 Tea/coffee Welcome
10.00-10.45 Medical diagnosis after LLMs (keynote talk) by Prof Brendan Delaney (Imperial College London)
10.45-11.30 AI in Mental Healthcare by Mr Anirban Lahiri (Arndit Ltd. and Kainos Ltd., UK)
11.30-11.45 Tea/coffee Break
11.45-12.30 Demystifying AI regulation by Dr Marinos Ioannides (Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, UK)
12.30-13.15 Hand-on tutorial: Low-Code AI Agents for Health, Farming, and Food
13.15-14.15 Lunch Break
14.15-15.00 Introduction to Quantum Computing and its Relevance for Biomedical Science by Dr Oliver Thomson Brown (University of Edinburgh)
15.00-15.45 Translating Quantum Food Futures by Dr Saihong Li (University of Stirling)
15.45-16.30 Emerging Opportunities for Quantum Technologies in Food and Health by Dr Aleksey Kozikov (Newcastle University)
16.30-16.45 Close

Further details at https://www.bcs-sgai.org/health2026/

There will be Certificates of Attendance for those who register and attend the event.

Registration on Eventbrite (includes refreshment and lunch!)
https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/ai-for-health-2026-tickets-1990787464898

My source: Dr. Mercedes Arguello Casteleiro (BCS SGAI)

2nd International Conference on Health Medical Systems and Services (HMSS 2026)

Dear Colleague,

🚨 Last Chance to Submit – Deadline: August 05, 2026

Are you shaping the future of smart, secure healthcare? Join global pioneers at the

The 2nd International Conference on

Health Medical Systems and Services (HMSS 2026)

📍 When & Where? 17–20 November 2026 | Barcelona, Spain

🌐 Explore More: https://hmss-conference.org

📝 Submission Portal: https://hmss-conference.org/authors.php

💡 From AI to cybersecurity, health and medical informatics, and digital health breakthroughs—HMSS 2026 is where innovation meets real-world impact.

🎓 IEEE-indexed (https://conferences.ieee.org/conferences_events/conferences/conferencedetails/71742)

🚀 Submit your paper today and take part in redefining healthcare technology!
📧 Questions? Reach us at: info AT hmss-conference.org

Warm regards,
HMSS 2026 Organizing Committee

My source: SOCIOTECH List at JISCMAIL.AC.UK

Leapspace ii - References

Of the references listed by LEAPSPACE #6 stood out:

Merritt, M.K., Procter, N. (2010) Conceptualising the functional role of mental health consultation-liaison nurse in multi-morbidity, using Peplau's nursing theory. Contemporary Nurse. https://doi.org/10.5172/conu.2010.34.2.158 

Had I missed this? When I hear (read) of new citation for Hodges' model, it is added to the blog's bibliography. So, what about this one?

I could not access the full-paper initially, but did so at:

https://lmscontent.embanet.com/MVU/NURS600/Readings/W3_Peplau.pdf

I can see that Merrit and Proctor reference the following [#16 of 1-46]:

Jones, P. (1998). Hodges’ health career – Care domains – Model, nursing – Art or science? Retrieved October 4, 2009, from http://www.pjones.demon.co.uk/holsci.html

This additional cognitive and motivational nourishment is welcome. They are spot on with '1998', the year the former website (p-jones.demon.co.uk) went live. 

Pre-2015 and indicative of (what will increasingly follow) from AI, LLMs, agentic ai - LEAPSPACE found a page on the now archived website:

https://web.archive.org/web/20150409004111/http://www.p-jones.demon.co.uk/index.htm

While a positive, perhaps (again) we should worry about regurgitation? Although on another level perhaps the definition of 'grey literature' is also being (has been) redefined?

There is a positive in the author's acknowledgement of Hodges' model on several counts, being associated with:

• Highlighting the need for inclusion of mental health/illness (parity of esteem);
• Peplau's seminal work;
• A search to link mental health with other specialities (emergency, liaison, burns);
• Recognition of the inverse (psychological care within medicine); 
• The fact of being listed with Phil Barker (Tidal Model). 

Negatively, on the archived homepage (above) many links to content may not work:

The (rather short but referenced) page Merrit and Proctor list is available here:

https://web.archive.org/web/20111018204743/http://www.p-jones.demon.co.uk/holsci.html

I will insert this paper in the bibliographical listing; and revisit this.

1st Workshop on the Internet of Mirrors (IoM): Connected Intelligence for Healthcare, Beauty, and Immersive Digital Experiences

Dear Colleagues,

I would like to invite your technical papers submissions to our 1st Workshop on the Internet of Mirrors (IoM): Connected Intelligence for Healthcare, Beauty, and Immersive Digital Experiences, which will be held in IEEE WF-IoT 2026 in Abu Dhabi, UAE.

Workshop Focus

The Internet of Mirrors (IoM) is an emerging IoT ecosystem built around interconnected smart mirrors that can sense, process, communicate, and deliver personalised services across healthcare, beauty, wellness, assisted living, fitness, and immersive digital experiences.
Although the workshop is centred on the Internet of Mirrors, the realisation of this vision requires multi-domain expertise. As such, we are very keen to receive contributions not only from researchers directly working on IoM, but also from those developing the architectures, algorithms, communication technologies, computing frameworks, and application domains that will underpin future intelligent IoT ecosystems.

Topics of Interest

• Relevant topics include, but are not limited to:Edge, fog, and cloud computing for IoT systems
• Distributed intelligence and multi-agent AI
• AI-enabled IoT applications and personalised services
• Multimodal sensing, data fusion, and contextual awareness
• Intelligent task orchestration and adaptive resource allocation
• Wireless connectivity, 5G/6G, and network optimisation
• Privacy-preserving AI, security, interoperability, and trustworthy AI
• Human-computer interaction, accessibility, and inclusive smart interfaces
• Digital twins, immersive technologies, and metaverse-enabled experiences
• Internet of Sounds, Internet of Medical Things, and broader Internet of Everything ecosystems
• Smart healthcare, assisted living, wellness, fitness, beauty, and immersive digital lifestyle applications
• Proof-of-concept implementations, benchmarking, testbeds, and real-world IoT deployments

Important Dates 

• Paper submission deadline: 12 July 2026
• Notification of acceptance: 15 August 2026
• Camera-ready deadline: 30 August 2026

Workshop Chairs

• Lina Mohjazi, University of Glasgow, UK
• Luca Truchet, University of Trento, ITALY
• Ahmad Taha, University of Glasgow, UK
• Rabeb Mizouni, Khalifa University, UAE
• Muhammad Ali Imran, University of Glasgow, UK
• Haneen Fatima, University of Glasgow, UK

Information

Workshop website: https://sites.google.com/view/wfiot2026-workshop-iom
Submission link: https://edas.info/newPaper.php?c=34901&track=138858

Contact Emails:
l.mohjazi AT ieee.org
ahmad.taha AT glasgow.ac.uk

It would be wonderful if you could consider submitting relevant work, or share the call with colleagues and students who may be interested!
--
Kind regards,
Dr Kubra Duran
Postdoctoral Fellow
Edinburgh Napier University, UK

My source: SOCIOTECH list - JISC

vi Book: 'Complexity in Health Care - A Paradigm Shift for Clinical Practice'

The rest of the book is practice-based which is a strength. Chapter 18 has three clinical illustrations, were reflection and self-reflection is brought to fore. Especially so, as it pointed out that the 'clinical situation/encounter' introduces its own 'vagaries', or noise which can impact the 'quality of the bond between clinician and patient'. Rapport is the key. 

I was still missing 'complexity' and its dynamics, but I'm sure of the following:

If this was discussed - could be represented then the book would be theory-laden and I and other would-be readers would not be able to understand.

I still think Hodges' model can help, and in chapter 19 picked out 'manifold' (p.113), as if doing so, manifests something more esoteric. There is something here, the author noting the need to shift from individual to group perspectives. So, yes I think we can do more than embrace 'complexity' (p.114).

On page 116 there is discussion of the sometimes sudden path to recovery, 'probably common but often not comprehended'. Please pardon the naivety, but I scribbled 'hidden in complexity, what would (say) the three(?) equations be?'. For a book published in 2023 'artificial intelligence' is not indexed. This might be one area that AI could assist, given the progress in formal mathematics (but see below p.183!)? Algorithm is mentioned throughout the book. Further reading here, informed me that engaging with a reading group on 'Philosophical Counselling' is worthwhile. It is!

Part IX had me wondering if the debate about typical and complex cases, there is a slight of perspective going on? You can end up with paradoxes in terms of an individual's needs, criteria, risk, 'need for admission'. Which I must think about! Chapter 20 has three further reading texts on abductive reasoning. There's an appeal(?) on page 129 for an appropriate treatment model, well that is my take. Collaborative care and stepped care models are suggested. But with acknowledgement that:

'In truth, all models currently available may involve a defect in continuity within or between systems'. p.129.

I beg to differ. A role of Hodges' model is to help frame aspects of care through time, to facilitate and assure continuity.

Part X tackles the required precision in assessment, hence recourse to mathematics and statistics. The next two chapters may be useful for early career researchers and yet looking over our shoulders what is ai offering here? In Case 1 I was impressed by the suggestion of a health record that is over 70 years old. Not impossible of course, but I thought of the Lloyd George envelopes, their hospital equivalents, other paper sources and inevitable scanning this would entail here in the UK? Of interest to research is the creation and validation of complexity profiling inventories (tools) not just that, but their self-assessment form of delivery. And, yes in summary chapter 24:

'We are still left with the challenge of rating the patients' severely compromised health situations where "health" includes social, emotional, and financial well-being.' p.143.

'How do you factor this interpersonal situation into your complexity equation?' p.144.

Yes, how indeed? 

The realities of research of dealt with - funding for the development of tools a problem universally. The references here concern biopsychosocial complexity. Chapter 25 describes abstraction, and hiding detail, which is of great interest here. DSM-5 criteria for major depressive disorder are listed (DSM-6 may be released in 2029?). 

In chapter 25 the authors are once stymied by 'how to include (integrate? PJ) four dimensions, three time periods,and assorted assessment items in a single assessment.' 

As noted the four domains are here again (p.151): medical, psychological, social and care delivery and on page 153, introducing chapter 26, limitations of complexity assessment tools. Parity as in 'parity of esteem' is not indexed and I don't recall having read this, but this is well represented in later deliberations on variables #2. You will find psychosis, but not in depth or severity.

 In 'Creation of a New Model for Clinical Practice' (Chapter 31) identity is stressed, as a prompt to encompass those variables that contribute to preserving the person - what is humanistic. Allied with manifold, identity is a 'coi' for me, concept of interest - for this same reason. On page 172: the authors observe they 'are left with the question of whether there are acceptably accurate clinical models that are simpler and more straightforward than ours? We believe the answer is no!'. I believe there is a way, and a model to help 'keep the life in clinical work' - not take it out. There is a sense that Chapter 32 seeks what I was looking for above: as they explore random variable and 'sample spaces' descriptively - over a page.

Ah! 'Artificial intelligence' is found in text p.183. I'm surprised an editor, proofreader aloud the following sentence to go unchallenged?

'But, as will be discussed, these computer techniques have their limitations based on their lack of flexibility.' 

I was genuinely surprised to read this. Plus, again on ai on page 185: 'Making inferences is not reliably their domain.' I think I would look more at the human-ai interface. And the status of ai within psychiatry as opposed to medicine, but that is also another (parity - divide) debate. Things really are complex now on so many fronts: ethics especially.

Perhaps I am looking for the cookbook formula as introduced for chapter 35 clinical judgement. The further reading is combined with critical thinking. More detail on the empirical-collaborative method is welcome. When I read 'illustrated' I take this literally. Again I can disagree twice on page 220. I know Hodges' model is not validated, but it can - with practice(?) - do this light (simple) or heavy (complex) lifting. 

The warning about dogma needs to be repeated regularly. It is rather like the need for nurses to revisit their profession, role and work as relates to the law. Is Hodges' model an over-valued idea? Am I guilty of thinking I'm an expert? A problem with that view is that any assumed expertise is stretched across the whole model. So if anything there is a shallowness, but this means that I see my particular scope of practice, as other colleagues / professions see theirs. Here in the UK of late, this seems to have become rather blurred. 

In closing with this and achieving a "real-life" understanding of a case, with synthesis - path analysis diagram, the author's underline the value of their book which I have enjoyed and informed my preparation for WCCS26 (more to follow there). The authors can perhaps be reassured that all practitioners have a means to achieve their paradigm shift as described here - with added value and values.

There is a missed word: "of the situation ['with'?] him" on page 114. And revision needed re. text beginning with 'his boyish Paul McCartney "mop-top" ... on page 214. Spelling error on 216 'retu(r)ning'. 

Thanks again to Daniela and colleagues at SpringerNature for the review copy.

Steven A. Frankel, Steven D. Thurber, James A. Bourgeois (2023) Complexity in Health Care: A Paradigm Shift for Clinical Practice. Cham. Switzerland: Springer. ISBN: 978303114948.

Hodges' model: An antidote to "Cognitive Surrender"*

'The pope's counterpoint that humanity flourishes "not despite limitations but often through them" is one that many people are becoming more aware of in the case of "cognitive surrender": the realisation that making things easier through AI can diminish rather than enhance our abilities. It is in a similar vein that the FT commits to always keeping human judgement at the centre of our journalism.'

* - and burnout?

The FT View, The ethical dilemmas of artificial intelligence. FTWeekend, 6-7 June 2026, p.12.
https://www.ft.com/content/d2c90246-11d7-4169-ac35-988de7fdb2af?syn-25a6b1a6=1

See also: https://www.futureofbeinghuman.com/p/magnifica-humanitas-and-being-human

Previously: 'ai' : 'language'

#RCN26 RCN Congress - Nurse Education

If you think hard-enough all the debates at RCN Congress connect to 'education', but two are laser-focussed:

Protecting nurse education

Resolution submitted by the Education Forum
That this meeting of RCN Congress asks RCN Council to lobby UK governments to protect nurse education from university sector economic pressures.

Quality of clinical placements

Matter for discussion submitted by the Students Committee
That this meeting of RCN Congress discusses ways in which the quality of clinical placements can be ensured and consistent across all 4 countries.

For more senior colleagues, you may momentarily think back - all rose-tinted - to the pre-undergraduate Schools of Nursing, but you also realise change was needed and inevitable. A new millennium was fast approaching.

Now, however it seems within the university ecosystem, nursing is a threatened subject and discipline. Nurse education is exposed and itself vulnerable. In the 21st century fitness-stakes - finance wins:

individual

|

INTERPERSONAL : SCIENCES

humanistic ------------------------------- mechanistic

SOCIOLOGY : POLITICAL

|

group

mental fitness	physical fitness
SOCIAL VALUE  & VALUES	FINANCIAL FITNESS

 

At RCN Congress, the status of nursing as a profession in the USA, was raised. Looking online, I found the following at the U.S. Department of Education: Myth vs. Fact: The Definition of Professional Degrees.

In January 2025 I posted about the situation at Cardiff University. At Congress the matter of the quality of clinical placements, became a resolution. The protection of nurse education provoked an impassioned and emotional debate. Student nurses seeing what is happening to nurse faculty. Nurse faculty seeing the years of experience 'walk' be-pushed out through the door. It seems there is no collective noun for a group, or collection of redundancies. Mass comes to mind, especially in this instance. A 'rash' seems appropriate. But, the condition is more serious and bears further investigation:

As a Google search demonstrates - https://share.google/SViFPWuJovKWhErEE

IT doesn't stop there ...

How many of us (nurses, and other 'professionals') are seeing job offers(?) such as:

Remote
Contract

$35/hr - $80/hr (this is lower than others ...)

About the job

Nursing Informatics Specialist (AI Training)

About The Role

Your clinical knowledge is more valuable than you think — beyond the bedside. We're looking for experienced nursing professionals to help train and evaluate AI systems built for healthcare. As a Nursing Informatics Specialist at Alignerr, you'll apply your frontline expertise to ensure AI understands real-world clinical workflows, EHR systems, and nursing documentation the way actual nurses do.

This is a unique opportunity to work at the intersection of nursing practice and cutting-edge AI — on your own schedule, from anywhere.

• Organization: ---------
• Type: Hourly Contract
• Location: Remote
• Commitment: 10–40 hours/week
  
  

What You'll Do

• Evaluate AI-generated clinical content for accuracy, safety, and alignment with real nursing workflows
• Review and annotate EHR documentation scenarios, flagging errors or gaps in clinical reasoning
• Translate nursing practice knowledge into structured feedback that improves AI model outputs
• Assess how well AI systems reflect clinical informatics best practices across areas like documentation, data integrity, and care coordination
• Provide expert insight on health IT tools, including EHR platforms such as Epic or Cerner
• Work independently and asynchronously on task-based assignments
  
  

Who You Are

• Registered Nurse (RN) or equivalent clinical background with hands-on experience in a healthcare setting
• Familiar with EHR systems and clinical documentation workflows
• Able to analyze clinical scenarios and communicate clear, structured feedback
• Detail-oriented with strong written communication skills
• Self-motivated and comfortable working independently in a remote environment
• No prior AI experience required — your clinical expertise is what matters
  
  

Nice to Have

• Experience in clinical informatics, health IT, or nursing informatics roles
• Familiarity with data annotation, quality review, or evaluation processes
• Background in quality improvement, patient safety, or clinical education
• Exposure to health data standards (e.g., HL7, FHIR, SNOMED)
  
  

Why Join Us

• Work on cutting-edge AI projects with leading research labs and AI teams
• Fully remote and flexible — set your own hours and work at your own pace
• Freelance perks: autonomy, variety, and global collaboration
• Apply your nursing expertise in a completely new and impactful way
• Contribute to AI that could meaningfully improve how healthcare technology serves patients and clinicians
• Potential for ongoing work and contract extension

You might think (no pun intended!): 

'Well this all about informatics. Don't worry - it will all work out fine!'

But, please notice, the clinical and nursing requirement:

"Registered Nurse (RN) or equivalent clinical background with hands-on experience in a healthcare setting."

Not exactly, Hodges' model is it? Even if specific to this role, what does it say:

• about :: the title of 'Registered Nurse'
• about :: Nurses and Nursing as a Profession
• and :: to search engines and agentic AI?

So be aware, and concerned (worried even!) for nursing and nurse education ... 
for the humanity of healthcare:

individual

|

INTERPERSONAL : SCIENCES

humanistic ------------------------------- mechanistic

SOCIOLOGY : POLITICAL

|

group

de-humanisation	BIG TECH
"Where has everyone gone?" Social values Social justice What about research, debate, evidence..?	Nursing Faculty Universities as Institutions that reflect Society Why is there an echo in here? It's been hollowed out.

P.S. I am not a technophobe. Previously: 'AI' : 'SOCIO-technical'