212 research outputs found

    The True Prevalence of “Sexting”.

    Get PDF
    This factsheet presents and critiques the findings of recent studies estimating the prevalence of youth “sexting.” The authors contend that research findings to date have been inconsistent and many widely‐publicized studies have been flawed in their design. It is difficult to compare findings and draw clear conclusions due to inconsistent terminology between studies and the inclusion of material not of primary concern to the public and law enforcement, such as text‐only messages, images of adults, or images of youth that do not constitute child pornography under legal statutes. These findings are then often reported in distorted or exaggerated ways by the media, leading to public misperception. The authors present a number of suggestions to future researchers and to journalists wishing to cite statistics on sexting

    Rescue, rehabilitation, and release of marine mammals: An analysis of current views and practices.

    Get PDF
    Stranded marine mammals have long attracted public attention. Those that wash up dead are, for all their value to science, seldom seen by the public as more than curiosities. Animals that are sick, injured, orphaned or abandoned ignite a different response. Generally, public sentiment supports any effort to rescue, treat and return them to sea. Institutions displaying marine mammals showed an early interest in live-stranded animals as a source of specimens -- in 1948, Marine Studios in St. Augustine, Florida, rescued a young short-finned pilot whale (Globicephala macrorhynchus), the first ever in captivity (Kritzler 1952). Eventually, the public as well as government agencies looked to these institutions for their recognized expertise in marine mammal care and medicine. More recently, facilities have been established for the sole purpose of rehabilitating marine mammals and preparing them for return to the wild. Four such institutions are the Marine Mammal Center (Sausalito, CA), the Research Institute for Nature Management (Pieterburen, The Netherlands), the RSPCA, Norfolk Wildlife Hospital (Norfolk, United Kingdom) and the Institute for Wildlife Biology of Christian-Albrects University (Kiel, Germany).(PDF contains 68 pages.

    A Practical Framework for Navigating Ethical Challenges in Collaborative Community Research

    Get PDF
    To effectively mobilize community-based organizations (CBOs) and international non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in research, important ethical issues must be addressed. A memorandum of understanding (MOU) approach, providing a framework and a tool to be used for establishing effective community-research partnerships, was developed by the Community Collaboration Core (CCC) of the HIV Center for Clinical and Behavioral Studies. Aims of the CCC include: (1) Initiating and sustaining successful partnerships in HIV prevention research in areas of sexuality, gender, mental health, and of mutual benefit to communities; (2) Advancing the science of collaboration among researchers, practitioners, and government in HIV prevention. Developed and assessed over a two-year period by researchers, CBO/NGO and public health representatives, this MOU can be used by potential research and community partners to address the most important issues early in a collaborative research project. Clarifying essential roles, responsibilities, and relationships, establishing trust and transparency in that process, can guide collaborators in planning the important steps for beginning and sustaining an ethical and successful research project

    A Practical Framework for Navigating Ethical Challenges in Collaborative Community Research

    Get PDF
    To effectively mobilize community-based organizations (CBOs) and international non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in research, important ethical issues must be addressed. A memorandum of understanding (MOU) approach, providing a framework and a tool to be used for establishing effective community-research partnerships, was developed by the Community Collaboration Core (CCC) of the HIV Center for Clinical and Behavioral Studies. Aims of the CCC include: (1) Initiating and sustaining successful partnerships in HIV prevention research in areas of sexuality, gender, mental health, and of mutual benefit to communities; (2) Advancing the science of collaboration among researchers, practitioners, and government in HIV prevention. Developed and assessed over a two-year period by researchers, CBO/NGO and public health representatives, this MOU can be used by potential research and community partners to address the most important issues early in a collaborative research project. Clarifying essential roles, responsibilities, and relationships, establishing trust and transparency in that process, can guide collaborators in planning the important steps for beginning and sustaining an ethical and successful research project

    What Offline and Online Technologies do Higher Education Students Use to Complete Assessment Tasks?

    Get PDF
    A Personal Learning Environment (PLE) is a system, usually self-constructed, that enables learners to manage their own learning and may include tools, services, online resources and communities. The aim of the project: to determine which technologies students use when they prepare, complete and submit assessment tasks such as assignments and examinations. The participants (n=39): 24 students from Edith Cowan University in WA and 15 students from Avondale in NSW. All students were undergraduate, on-campus students from Education and Arts courses, mainly female, most were aged between 20-24 years. Previous research has defined PLEs (Dabbagh & Kitsantas, (2012), especially in social constructivist contexts using learner-centred pedagogies (van Harmelen, 2008; Wild, Mdritscher, & Sigurdarson, 2008). Gosper et al. (2013; 2014) have outlined the use of technologies for learning in higher education in general. The methodology of the project used a mixed methods approach using a modification of Clark et al.’s (2009) methods: 1) online questionnaire; 2) focus group; and 3) mapping exercise. Students used a moderate range of formal (provided by the institution) and informal (student-selected) technologies that were used in social and individual contexts, but most technology use was informal. The range of locations in which technologies were used was wide, and reflected a high value placed on mobility and Wi-Fi connectivity

    What Offline and Online Technologies do Higher Education Students Use to Complete Assessment Tasks?

    Get PDF
    A Personal Learning Environment (PLE) is a system, usually self-constructed, that enables learners to manage their own learning and may include tools, services, online resources and communities. The aim of the project: to determine which technologies students use when they prepare, complete and submit assessment tasks such as assignments and examinations. The participants (n=39): 24 students from Edith Cowan University in WA and 15 students from Avondale in NSW. All students were undergraduate, on-campus students from Education and Arts courses, mainly female, most were aged between 20-24 years. Previous research has defined PLEs (Dabbagh & Kitsantas, (2012), especially in social constructivist contexts using learner-centred pedagogies (van Harmelen, 2008; Wild, Mdritscher, & Sigurdarson, 2008). Gosper et al. (2013; 2014) have outlined the use of technologies for learning in higher education in general. The methodology of the project used a mixed methods approach using a modification of Clark et al.’s (2009) methods: 1) online questionnaire; 2) focus group; and 3) mapping exercise. Students used a moderate range of formal (provided by the institution) and informal (student-selected) technologies that were used in social and individual contexts, but most technology use was informal. The range of locations in which technologies were used was wide, and reflected a high value placed on mobility and Wi-Fi connectivity

    Examination of change factor methodologies for climate change impact assessment

    Get PDF
    Citation: Anandhi, A., Frei, A., Pierson, D. C., Schneiderman, E. M., Zion, M. S., Lounsbury, D., and Matonse, A. H. ( 2011), Examination of change factor methodologies for climate change impact assessment, Water Resour. Res., 47, W03501, doi:10.1029/2010WR009104.A variety of methods are available to estimate values of meteorological variables at future times and at spatial scales that are appropriate for local climate change impact assessment. One commonly used method is Change Factor Methodology (CFM), sometimes referred to as delta change factor methodology. Although more sophisticated methods exist, CFM is still widely applicable and used in impact analysis studies. While there are a number of different ways by which change factors (CFs) can be calculated and used to estimate future climate scenarios, there are no clear guidelines available in the literature to decide which methodologies are most suitable for different applications. In this study several categories of CFM (additive versus multiplicative and single versus multiple) for a number of climate variables are compared and contrasted. The study employs several theoretical case studies, as well as a real example from Cannonsville watershed, which supplies water to New York City, USA. Results show that in cases when the frequency distribution of Global Climate Model (GCM) baseline climate is close to the frequency distribution of observed climate, or when the frequency distribution of GCM future climate is close to the frequency distribution of GCM baseline climate, additive and multiplicative single CFMs provide comparable results. Two options to guide the choice of CFM are suggested. The first option is a detailed methodological analysis for choosing the most appropriate CFM. The second option is a default method for use under circumstances in which a detailed methodological analysis is too cumbersome

    Patterns of HIV Service Use and HIV Viral Suppression Among Patients Treated in an Academic Infectious Diseases Clinic in North Carolina

    Get PDF
    Irregular participation in HIV medical care hinders HIV RNA suppression and impacts health among people living with HIV. Cluster analysis of clinical data from 1,748 patients attending a large academic medical center yielded three HIV service usage patterns, namely: ‘engaged in care’, ‘sporadic care’, and ‘frequent use’. Patients ‘engaged in care’ exhibited most consistent retention (on average, >88 % of each patient’s observation years had ≄2 visits 90 days apart), annualized visit use (2.9 mean visits/year) and viral suppression (>73 % HIV RNA tests <400 c/mL). Patients in ‘sporadic care’ demonstrated lower retention (46–52 %), visit use (1.7 visits/year) and viral suppression (56 % <400 c/mL). Patients with ‘frequent use’ (5.2 visits/year) had more inpatient and emergency visits. Female, out-of-state residence, low attendance during the first observation year and detectable first-observed HIV RNA were early predictors of subsequent service usage. Patients ‘engaged in care’ were more likely to have HIV RNA <400 than those receiving sporadic care. Results confirm earlier findings that under-utilization of services predicts poorer viral suppression and health out-comes and support recommendations for 2–3 visits/year

    Higher Education Student\u27s Use of Technologies for Assessment Within Personal Learning Environments (PLEs)

    Get PDF
    Higher education students\u27 use of technologies has been documented over the years but their specific use of technologies for assessment-related tasks has yet to be fully investigated. Researchers at two higher education institutions recently conducted a study which sought to discover the technologies most commonly used by students within their Personal Learning Environments (PLEs). A specific aim of the study was to determine which of these technologies the students used when they complete and submit assessment tasks such as assignments and examinations. Results from questionnaires, focus groups and mapping exercises are reported and the implications of the findings for developing institutional infrastructure to engage students and support their learning are highlighted
    • 

    corecore