Do laypersons conflate poverty and neglect?

ObjectiveChild neglect is often initially identified via adults who come into contact with children and report their suspicions to the authorities. Little is known about what behaviors laypersons view as constituting neglect and hence worth reporting. We examined laypersons' perceptions of neglect and poverty, particularly how these factors independently and jointly shaped laypersons' decisions about what warrants official reporting of neglect, and how laypersons' socioeconomic background related to their decisions.HypothesesWe anticipated that neglect would be correctly perceived as such, but that extreme poverty would also be perceived as neglect, with these latter perceptions being most pronounced among laypersons of higher socioeconomic background.MethodIn 2 studies, adults read vignettes about a mother's care of her daughter and rendered decisions about whether the mother's behavior met the legal standard of neglect and should be reported. In Study 1 (N = 365, 55% female, mean age = 37.12 years), indicators of poverty and neglect were manipulated. In Study 2 (N = 474, 53% female, mean age = 38.25 years), only poverty (housing instability: homelessness vs. not) was manipulated.ResultsLaypersons often conflated poverty and neglect, especially in circumstances of homelessness. Laypersons of lower socioeconomic background were less likely to perceive neglect in general and to report an obligation to make a referral (R2s ranged from 17-26%, odds ratios ranged from 2.24-3.08).ConclusionsLaypersons may overreport neglect in circumstances of poverty. Increasing public awareness of how to recognize and separate neglect from poverty may enhance identification of vulnerable children and families. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved)

Do children unintentionally report maltreatment? Comparison of disclosures of neglect versus sexual abuse

Background and aimsChildren's initial reports often play a key role in the identification of maltreatment, and a sizeable amount of scientific research has examined how children disclose sexual and physical abuse. Although neglect constitutes a large proportion of maltreatment experiences, relatively little attention has been directed toward understanding whether and how children disclose neglect. The overarching aim of the present study was to document this process by comparing disclosure patterns in cases of neglect to those in cases of sexual abuse.MethodRedacted jurisdiction reports (N = 136) of substantiated dependency cases of neglect (n = 71) and sexual abuse (n = 65) in 4- to 17-year-olds were coded for why maltreatment was suspected, and for children's perceived awareness and disclosure of the maltreatment.ResultsNeglect was most often initially suspected via contact with emergency services (e.g., police, emergency medical services), whereas sexual abuse was most often initially suspected as a result of children's statements. Children evidenced greater perceived awareness of sexual abuse than neglect and were more likely to disclose the former in their first investigative interview. Perceived awareness was further associated with a higher likelihood of children's statements initiating discovery of maltreatment and disclosing in the first investigative interview.ConclusionsChildren may benefit from greater knowledge about their needs for safety, supervision, and provision in the home, which could increase the likelihood they would disclose neglect. Such, in turn, could lead to earlier interventions for children and families

Grading Error Reduces Grower Incentive to Increase Prune Quality

Grading is important to ensure the production of high-quality foods, but It Is usually done with error, distorting market signals and diminishing Incentives to produce high-quality products. Size is the main quality criterion for dried prunes and the crucial characteristic In determining prune value. We studied the economic effects of errors In commodity grading, focusing In particular on the Implications of one-way (asymmetric) grading errors, namely when small, low quality product Is erroneously classified as high quality, but not vice versa. In an application to the California prune Industry, we estimated the extent to which large prunes are undervalued and small prunes are overvalued. We conclude that grading error means that prunes graded as high-quality may not really be high-quality prunes. The presence of these Incorrectly graded prunes depresses the prices that growers are paid for high-quality prunes and increases the net returns for small prunes. As a result, growers face reduced incentives to produce larger prunes

Asymmetric Grading Error and Adverse Selection: Lemons in the California Prune Industry

Grading systems are often introduced to address the classic adverse selection problem associated with asymmetric information about product quality. However, grades are rarely measured perfectly, and adverse selection outcomes may persist due to grading error. We study the effects of errors in grading, focusing on asymmetric grading errors-namely when low-quality product can erroneously be classified as high quality, but not vice versa. In a conceptual model, we show the effects of asymmetric grading errors on returns to producers. Application to the California prune industry shows that grading errors reduce incentives to produce more valuable, larger prunes

Genetic variation in EPHA contributes to sensitivity to paclitaxel‐induced peripheral neuropathy

Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/154957/1/bcp14192.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/154957/2/bcp14192_am.pd

The research on endothelial function in women and men at risk for cardiovascular disease (REWARD) study: methodology

Background Endothelial function has been shown to be a highly sensitive marker for the overall cardiovascular risk of an individual. Furthermore, there is evidence of important sex differences in endothelial function that may underlie the differential presentation of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in women relative to men. As such, measuring endothelial function may have sex-specific prognostic value for the prediction of CVD events, thus improving risk stratification for the overall prediction of CVD in both men and women. The primary objective of this study is to assess the clinical utility of the forearm hyperaemic reactivity (FHR) test (a proxy measure of endothelial function) for the prediction of CVD events in men vs. women using a novel, noninvasive nuclear medicine -based approach. It is hypothesised that: 1) endothelial dysfunction will be a significant predictor of 5-year CVD events independent of baseline stress test results, clinical, demographic, and psychological variables in both men and women; and 2) endothelial dysfunction will be a better predictor of 5-year CVD events in women compared to men. Methods/Design A total of 1972 patients (812 men and 1160 women) undergoing a dipyridamole stress testing were recruited. Medical history, CVD risk factors, health behaviours, psychological status, and gender identity were assessed via structured interview or self-report questionnaires at baseline. In addition, FHR was assessed, as well as levels of sex hormones via blood draw. Patients will be followed for 5 years to assess major CVD events (cardiac mortality, non-fatal MI, revascularization procedures, and cerebrovascular events). Discussion This is the first study to determine the extent and nature of any sex differences in the ability of endothelial function to predict CVD events. We believe the results of this study will provide data that will better inform the choice of diagnostic tests in men and women and bring the quality of risk stratification in women on par with that of men

Diverse perspectives on interdisciplinarity from the Members of the College of the Royal Society of Canada

Various multiple-disciplinary terms and concepts (although most commonly “interdisciplinarity”, which is used herein) are used to frame education, scholarship, research, and interactions within and outside academia. In principle, the premise of interdisciplinarity may appear to have many strengths; yet, the extent to which interdisciplinarity is embraced by the current generation of academics, the benefits and risks for doing so, and the barriers and facilitators to achieving interdisciplinarity represent inherent challenges. Much has been written on the topic of interdisciplinarity, but to our knowledge there have been few attempts to consider and present diverse perspectives from scholars, artists, and scientists in a cohesive manner. As a team of 57 members from the Canadian College of New Scholars, Artists, and Scientists of the Royal Society of Canada (the College) who self-identify as being engaged or interested in interdisciplinarity, we provide diverse intellectual, cultural, and social perspectives. The goal of this paper is to share our collective wisdom on this topic with the broader community and to stimulate discourse and debate on the merits and challenges associated with interdisciplinarity. Perhaps the clearest message emerging from this exercise is that working across established boundaries of scholarly communities is rewarding, necessary, and is more likely to result in impact. However, there are barriers that limit the ease with which this can occur (e.g., lack of institutional structures and funding to facilitate cross-disciplinary exploration). Occasionally, there can be significant risk associated with doing interdisciplinary work (e.g., lack of adequate measurement or recognition of work by disciplinary peers). Solving many of the world’s complex and pressing problems (e.g., climate change, sustainable agriculture, the burden of chronic disease, and aging populations) demand thinking and working across long-standing, but in some ways restrictive, academic boundaries. Academic institutions and key support structures, especially funding bodies, will play an important role in helping to realize what is readily apparent to all who contributed to this paper—that interdisciplinarity is essential for solving complex problems; it is the new norm. Failure to empower and encourage those doing this research will serve as a great impediment to training, knowledge, and addressing societal issues

Risky eBusiness: An Examination of Risk-taking, Online Disclosiveness, and Cyberstalking Victimization

The expansion of online social networking sites and the relative accessibility to personal information provided by these sites has raised concerns about the risks for a variety of negative experiences, including cyberstalking. The present study investigated whether the theoretical concepts of Routine Activities Theory (RAT) could account for patterns of cyberstalking victimization among social networking site users. The study employed a self-report survey design using a convenience sample of 321 female undergraduate students. RAT was operationalized in the cyber context by measuring the level of online disclosure, frequency of internet use (online exposure) and general proclivity for risk-taking behaviours among participants. Personal experiences of cyberstalking were also assessed. Analyses specifically examined the relationship between RAT variables and cyberstalking outcomes and the extent to which a specific form of guardianship, online disclosiveness, served as a mediator between online activities and the risk for victimization. Online exposure and a proclivity for social risk-taking were associated with cyberstalking victimization. Levels of online disclosure demonstrated a direct positive impact on cyberstalking victimization, however our findings elucidating the role of online disclosure as a guardianship effort mediating the effects of exposure on cyberstalking victimization were mixed