Jiwei Zheng

As effective ways to regulate protein levels, targeted protein degradation technologies have attracted great attention in recent years. Here, we established a novel integrin-facilitated lysosomal degradation (IFLD) strategy to degrade extracellular and cell membrane proteins using bifunctional compounds as molecular degraders. By conjugation of a target protein-binding ligand with an integrin-recognition ligand, the resulting molecular degrader proved to be highly efficient to induce the internalization and subsequent degradation of extracellular or cell membrane proteins in an integrin- and lysosome-dependent manner. As demonstrated in the development of BMS-L1-RGD, which is an efficient programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) degrader validated both in vitro and in vivo, the IFLD strategy expands the toolbox for regulation of secreted and membrane-associated proteins and thus has great potential to be applied in chemical biology and drug discovery.

We investigate the effects of a range of different types of anchor on WTP and WTA valuations of familiar consumer products, elicited through individuals’ buying or selling decisions at given prices. We find anchoring effects only when the anchor value is framed as a plausible price for the good for which the individual is a potential buyer or seller. Anchoring effects are stronger for WTA than for WTP. We conclude that anchoring effects can affect market behaviour, but that not all anchors are effective.

In an experiment on markets for services, we find that consumers are likely to stick to default tariffs and achieve suboptimal outcomes. We find that inattention to the task of choosing a better tariff is likely to be a substantial problem in addition to any task and tariff complexity effect. The institutional setup on which we primarily model our experiment is the UK electricity and gas markets, and our conclusion is that the new measures by the UK regulator Ofgem to improve consumer outcomes are likely to be of limited impact.

This paper reports an experimental investigation of Schelling's theory of focal points that compares group and individual behaviour. We find that, when players' interests are perfectly aligned, groups more often choose the salient option and achieve higher coordination success than individuals. However, in games with conflicts of interest, groups do not always perform better than individuals, especially when the degree of conflict is substantial. We also find that groups outperform individuals when identifying the solution to the coordination problem requires some level of cognitive sophistication. Finally, players that successfully identify the solution to this game also achieve greater coordination rates than other players in games with a low degree of conflict. This result raises the question of whether finding the focal point is more a matter of logic rather than imagination as Schelling argued.