Not so private lives

Not So Private Lives is the first national study to examine same-sex attracted Australians’ preferences for various forms of relationship recognition since the introduction of de facto status for same-sex couples at a federal level. It is also the first major study to investigate preferences for relationship recognition while taking into account the current legal status (in Australia or overseas) of an individual’s same-sex relationship. Findings from the relationship recognition measures of this survey demonstrate that same-sex attracted individuals, like other Australians, differ in the way they prefer their relationships to be formally recognised. However, the results show that the majority of same-sex attracted participants in this survey selected marriage as their personal choice. A federally recognised relationship documented at a registry other than marriage was the second most popular option, and de facto status was the third. The preference for a relationship without any legal status was selected by only 3% of the overall sample. Interestingly, marriage was still the majority choice irrespective of the current legal status of participants’ same-sex relationships (including no legal status). For example, of those currently in a de facto relationship, 55.4% stated they preferred marriage for themselves, 25.6% stated that they preferred a federally recognised relationship other than marriage, 17.7% selected de facto and 1.3% chose no legal status. Participants were also given the opportunity to select which forms of legal relationship recognition they would like to see remain and/or become available in this country for same-sex couples in general. Responses to this measure (which allowed for multiple selections) show that 77.4% would like to see marriage become available as an option, 59.9% would like to see a federally recognised relationship other than marriage be made available and 48% would like to see de facto recognition remain. These numbers indicate that many participants selected multiple options, suggesting that simply having a choice was an important factor. Although the data from this survey indicate that marriage is not for everyone, the majority of same- sex attracted participants in this national survey selected this type of relationship recognition as their personal choice and as a choice to be made available for their fellow same-sex attracted Australians

Deferred and deterred: a review of literature on the impact of deferrals on blood donors

Background: Potential blood donors can be deferred due to concerns about the impact of the donation on their health or the safety of the blood supply. To date, we lack a comprehensive review of the impact of deferrals on donors and how to mitigate adverse effects. Aims: The aim of this review was to describe the available literature on deferrals, with a focus on the impact of deferrals on donors’ subsequent behaviour, potential reasons for impact and the effectiveness of strategies to improve deferral processes and facilitate donor return. Method: A narrative review of the literature on blood donation deferrals was undertaken. Results: Deferral rates vary widely across different contexts, with female, younger, first time and minority donors more likely to be ineligible to donate. There is clear evidence that deferrals impact on future donation behaviour, particularly for those deferred at their first donation attempt. Deferral has a negative emotional impact if the deferral is permanent or related to positive test results, while emotions experienced at the time of a temporary deferral are related to donors’ willingness to return. Conclusion: An understanding of the impact of deferrals from the donor perspective provides key information to improve the blood centre practices. There is preliminary evidence of the effectiveness of strategies to retain donors, including enabling the ineligible donor to make an alternative contribution, providing clear information about the deferral, notifying the donor when they can return to donate and addressing practical barriers to return

Judgments of sexual assault: the impact of complainant emotional demeanor, gender and victim stereotypes

The sexual assault victim "who comes to the attention of the authorities has her victimization measured against the current rape mythologies" (R v. Seaboyer, 1991). This is particularly troubling given that lay beliefs regarding the crime of sexual assault are at odds with the data documenting the circumstances surrounding actual rape. Research has consistently demonstrated that lay people (hence, jurors) will question the validity of a sexual assault claim and judge the victim more harshly, if the circumstances surrounding the assault and/or the characteristics and actions of the sexual assault complainant do not comport with people's expectations about the event. In this paper we report the results of a juror simulation that examines the impact of victim's postassault emotional demeanor on judgments, in the context of independent manipulations of gender stereotypicality and victim stereotypicality. Results revealed that the complainant's emotional display had a powerful impact on participants' judgments, with the claim viewed as more valid when the complainant was portrayed as tearful/upset as opposed to calm/controlled, but only when the complainant was portrayed as gender stereotypic

Beyond Description: The Predictive Role of Affect, Memory, and Context in the Decision to Donate or Not Donate Blood

Research on the recruitment and retention of blood donors has typically drawn on a homogeneous set of descriptive theories, viewing the decision to become and remain a donor as the outcome of affectively cold, planned, and rational decision-making by the individual. While this approach provides insight into how our donors think about blood donation, it is limited and has not translated into a suite of effective interventions. In this review, we set out to explore how a broader consideration of the influences on donor decision-making, in terms of affect, memory, and the context in which donation takes place may yield benefit in the way we approach donor recruitment and retention. Drawing on emerging research, we argue for the importance of considering the implications of both the positive and negative emotions that donors experience and argue for the importance of directly targeting affect in interventions to recruit non-donors. Next, we focus on the reconstructed nature of memory and the factors that influence what we remember about an event. We discuss how these processes may impact the retention of donors and the potential to intervene to enhance donors’ recollections of their experiences. Finally, we discuss how our focus on the individual has led us to neglect the influence of the context in which donation takes place on donor behaviour. We argue that the amassing of comprehensive large data sets detailing both the characteristics of the individuals and the context of their giving will ultimately allow for the more effective deployment of resources to improve recruitment and retention. In suggesting these directions for future research, our want is to move beyond the ways we have traditionally described blood donation behaviour with the aim of improving our theorizing about donors while improving the translational value of our research

Simple Reciprocal Fairness Message to Enhance Non-Donor’s Willingness to Donate Blood

Background: Against a background of declining blood donor numbers, recruiting new donors is critical for the effective operations of healthcare providers. Thus, interventions are needed to recruit new blood donors. Purpose: We provide initial evidence for Voluntary Reciprocal Altruism (VRA) to enhance non-donors’ willingness to become blood donors. VRA interventions involve asking two questions: one on accepting a blood transfusion if needed and one on willingness to donate. As early trials often use self-reports of willingness to perform blood donation behavior, we derive a correction factor to better estimate actual behavior. Finally, we explore the effect of VRA interventions on two prosocial emotions: gratitude and guilt.Methods: Across three experiments (two in the UK and one in Australia: Total N = 1,214 non-donors) we manipulate VRA messages and explore how they affect both reported willingness to make a one-off or repeat blood donation and influence click through to blood donation, organ donation and volunteering registration sites (behavioral proxies). We report data from a longitudinal cohort that enables us to derive a correction for self-reported behavioral willingness.Results: Across the three experiments we show that exposure to a question that askes about accepting a transfusion if needed increased willingness to donate blood with some spillover to organ donor registration. We also show that gratitude has an independent effect on donation and report a behavioral correction factor of .10.Conclusions: Asking non-donors about accepting a transfusion if needed is likely to be an effective strategy to increase new donor numbers

Australian Perspectives on Opt-In and Opt-Out Consent Systems for Deceased Organ Donation

Introduction: As many countries change to opt-out systems to address organ shortages, calls for similar reform in Australia persist. Community perspectives on consent systems for donation remain under-researched, therefore Australian perspectives on consent systems and their effectiveness in increasing donation rates were explored. Design: In this descriptive cross-sectional study, participants completed a survey presenting opt-in, soft opt-out, and hard opt-out systems, with corresponding descriptions. Participants chose the system they perceived as most effective and described their reasoning. Results: Participants (N = 509) designated soft opt-out as the most effective system (52.3%; hard opt-out 33.7%; opt-in 13.7%). Those who identified with an ethnic/cultural group or were not registered had greater odds of choosing opt-out. Six themes identified in thematic analysis reflected their reasoning: 1) who decides (individual, shared decision with family); 2) right to choose; 3) acceptability (ethics, fairness); and utility in overcoming barriers for 4) individuals (apathy, awareness, ease of donating, fear/avoidance of death); 5) family (easier family experience, family veto); 6) society (normalising donation, donation as default, expanding donor pool). Choice and overcoming individual barriers were more frequently endorsed themes for opt-in and opt-out, respectively. Discussion: Results suggested the following insights regarding system effectiveness: uphold/prioritise individual’s recorded donation decision above family wishes; involve family in decision-making if no donation preference is recorded; retain a register enabling opt-in and opt-out for unequivocal decisions and promoting individual control; and maximise ease of registering. Future research should establish whether systems considered effective are also acceptable to the community to address organ shortages

Eligible blood donors’ decisions about donating stool for fecal microbiota transplantation: Does ambivalence play a role?

Blood collection agencies (BCAs) are expanding core business by inviting blood donors to donate stool for fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT). However, whether blood donors also want to donate stool is unclear since, despite its benefits, stool donation is viewed by many as unpleasant. This study examined the prevalence, contributors to, and role of these mixed feelings (ambivalence) in stool donation intentions.This cross-sectional study surveyed Australian residents aged 18 years or more who believed themselves eligible to donate blood and met broad criteria for prescreening as a stool donor (eg, healthy, not taking medication). Survey questions assessed attitude, norms, self-efficacy, motives, disgust, ambivalence, and intentions to donate stool.A total of 382 eligible blood donors aged not more than 50 years (mean, 28.71 years; 48% female, 62% "healthy" body mass index) participated. Six percent indicated no ambivalence about donating stool. In regression, significant determinants of ambivalence were less awareness of FMT, lower self-efficacy, motivated by ensuring that stool is available for loved ones, and more disgust about stool donation. Higher ambivalence contributed to decreased donation intention. Self-efficacy and disgust differentiated participants with moderate ambivalence, a group likely responsive to intervention, from those with low or high ambivalence.Ambivalence about donating stool was common among eligible blood donors. BCAs should raise awareness about stool donation and FMT before requesting donation. BCAs may increase cost savings and donor retention by giving clear guidance about donation requirements and implementing processes that build confidence. Early screening of potential donors for ambivalence and disgust will enable BCAs to provide decision support

Determinants of community members' willingness to donate stool for faecal microbiota transplantation.

Universal stool banks rely on, but face difficulties recruiting, community volunteers to donate stool for faecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) to effectively treat recurrent Clostridioides difficile. This study sought to identify determinants of community members' willingness to donate stool to guide donor recruitment. 397 Australian residents (52% male, 47% 21-30 years, 63% university educated) completed a survey to gauge willingness to donate stool, bowel habits, information needs, attitudes, barriers, and motives for donation. Most reported regular bowel movements (BMs; 90%), morning BMs (63%), BMs ≤5 minutes duration (67%), and some discomfort doing BMs in public restrooms (69%). Less than half were willing to donate stool in-centre (45% willing) or at home (48%). Important information needs identified by >80% were convenience and travel requirements associated with donation. Main barriers were logistics, capabilities to donate, disgust (e.g., donation process), and discomfort (e.g., privacy). The main motivator was altruism, with compensation secondary. Linear regression models identified less discomfort doing BMs in public restrooms (β = -0.15), understanding benefits to patients (β = 0.15), placing less importance on understanding the donation process (β = -0.13), and positive attitudes (β = 0.56) as determinants of willingness to donate in-centre. Understanding benefits to self (β = 0.11) and patients (β = 0.24), placing less importance on understanding the donation purpose (β = -0.19), and positive attitudes (β = 0.50) determined willingness to donate at home. Stool banks should consider donor's bowel habits, comfort donating in-centre, and information needs early in recruitment; and implement flexible logistics for potential donors who face time constraints and limited access to stool banks

Give where you live : A social network analysis of charitable donations reveals localized prosociality

Ajuts: Australian Government through the Australian Research Council's Discovery Projects, Grant/Award Number: DP210100137Millions of charities compete for donations, yet no empirical study has examined patterns of shared giving behavior across the nonprofit sector. To understand which types of charities are more likely to share donors, we conducted a social network analysis using behavioral data from 1,504,848 donors to 52 large charities in Australia. Three hypotheses were tested, which considered how patterns of shared donations may be determined by charity sub-type (e.g., health, social services, religious), type of beneficiaries (i.e., humans, animals, the environment), or geographic focus (i.e., international, national, regional). Overall, results indicate that patterns of shared giving are strongly shaped by geography: international charities typically share donors, as do charities operating in the same local region. Some-albeit inconsistent-evidence also emerged to support the notion that sub-type may be an organizing principle for donation distributions, but little support was found for the idea that beneficiaries influence shared giving patterns. A key managerial implication is that the practice of supporter list swapping may be most beneficial when lists are shared between organizations that both operate in the same geographic region rather than between organizations that both operate as the same sub-type of charity or both share similar beneficiaries

Re-evaluating how to measure jurors’ comprehension and application of jury instructions

In order for jurors to decide a legally correct verdict, they must comprehend and apply jury instructions. To date, empirical research has focused on jurors' comprehension of instructions. However, it is difficult to know how well jurors actually comprehend instructions, because the tests currently used by researchers to measure jurors' comprehension provide different estimates of jurors' comprehension. It is also difficult to know the degree to which jurors apply instructions, because researchers have not directly examined this question. This article reviews the current tests used to measure jurors' comprehension of instructions, and the current methods used to make inferences about jurors' application of instructions. It then critically analyses these approaches, and recommends ways to improve these approaches in future research, to enable researchers to draw more precise conclusions about the quality of jurors' decision-making