Psychosocial factors influencing the experience of sustainability professionals

Purpose The study seeks to gain insight into psychosocial factors influencing sustainability professionals in their work to lead by influencing and improving pro-environmental decision-making in their organisations. Approach Using Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis as a framework, the study enquires into the lived experience of sustainability professionals and leaders from the UK and Canada. The primary data source is semi- structured interviews, analysed with frame and metaphor analysis. Findings Key psychosocial factors involved in participants’ experience are identified, specifically psychological threat coping strategies, psychological needs, motivation and vitality, finding complex interactions between them. Tensions and trade-offs between competency, relatedness and autonomy needs and coping strategies such as suppression of negative emotion and ‘deep green’ identity are modelled in diagrams to show the dynamics. How these tensions are negotiated has implications for psychological wellbeing and effectiveness, as well as for pro-environmental cognition and behaviour. Implications The concepts and models presented in this paper may be of practical use to sustainability professionals, environmentalists and organisation leaders, for example in identifying interventions to develop inner resources, support authentic and effective action and disrupt maladaptive responses to ecological crisis. Originality/value The paper contributes insight to understanding of underlying processes shaping environmental cognition and behaviour, particularly in relation to psychological threat coping strategies and interacting factors. With a transdisciplinary approach, the methodology enables nuanced interpretation of complex phenomena to be generated, and addresses gaps in psychology and organisation studies sustainability research, with implications for the future study of sustainability leadership

Adjustment to colostomy: stoma acceptance, stoma care self-efficacy and interpersonal relationships

‘The definitive version is available at www.blackwell-synergy.com.’ Copyright Blackwell Publishing. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04446.xThis paper is a report of a study to examine adjustment and its relationship with stoma acceptance and social interaction, and the link between stoma care self-efficacy and adjustment in the presence of acceptance and social interactions.Peer reviewe

Heights of occupied patient beds: a possible risk factor for inpatient falls

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/72643/1/j.1365-2702.2007.02086.x.pd

Self-archiving and the Copyright Transfer Agreements of ISI-ranked library and information science journals

A study of Thomson-Scientific ISI ranked Library and Information Science (LIS) journals (n = 52) is reported. The study examined the stances of publishers as expressed in the Copyright Transfer Agreements (CTAs) of the journals toward self-archiving, the practice of depositing digital copies of one\u27s works in an Open Archives Initiative (OAI)-compliant open access repository. Sixty-two percent (32) do not make their CTAs available on the open Web; 38% (20) do. Of the 38% that do make CTAs available, two are open access journals. Of the 62% that do not have a publicly available CTA, 40% are silent about self-archiving. Even among the 20 journal CTAs publicly available there is a high level of ambiguity. Closer examination augmented by publisher policy documents on copyright, self-archiving, and instructions to authors reveals that only five, 10% of the ISI-ranked LIS journals in the study, actually prohibit self-archiving by publisher rule. Copyright is a moving target, but publishers appear to be acknowledging that copyright and open access can co-exist in scholarly journal publishing. The ambivalence of LIS journal publishers provides unique opportunities to members of the community. Authors can self-archive in open access archives. A society-led, global scholarly communication consortium can engage in the strategic building of the LIS information commons. Aggregating OAI-compliant archives and developing disciplinary-specific library services for an LIS commons has the potential to increase the field\u27s research impact and visibility. It may also ameliorate its own scholarly communication and publishing systems and serve as a model for others