Juror Perceptions of Bystander and Victim Intoxication by Different Substances

This study examined the effects of bystander or victim intoxication during a crime on juror perceptions and decision-making. Mock jurors (N = 261) read testimony from a bystander or victim to an assault, who mentioned that they had consumed alcohol, cannabis, amphetamines, or no substances prior to the crime. Participants delivered a verdict, rated the defendant’s guilt, and rated the bystander/victim on their honesty, credibility, and cognitive competence. Witness intoxication and witness role did not influence defendant guilt. However, participants judged any witness intoxicated by amphetamines as less credible and cognitively competent than a sober witness. Furthermore, victims were judged to have lower credibility, cognitive competence, and honesty than bystanders. These findings suggest that jurors’ decision-making about defendant guilt might not be influenced by witness intoxication or witness type. A witness’ testimony, however, might be evaluated as less credible when delivered by a victim or an amphetamine-intoxicated witness

Juror Perceptions of Bystander and Victim Intoxication by Different Substances

This study examined the effects of bystander or victim intoxication during a crime on juror perceptions and decision-making. Mock jurors (N = 261) read testimony from a bystander or victim to an assault, who mentioned that they had consumed alcohol, cannabis, amphetamines, or no substances prior to the crime. Participants delivered a verdict, rated the defendant’s guilt, and rated the bystander/victim on their honesty, credibility, and cognitive competence. Witness intoxication and witness role did not influence defendant guilt. However, participants judged any witness intoxicated by amphetamines as less credible and cognitively competent than a sober witness. Furthermore, victims were judged to have lower credibility, cognitive competence, and honesty than bystanders. These findings suggest that jurors’ decision-making about defendant guilt might not be influenced by witness intoxication or witness type. A witness’ testimony, however, might be evaluated as less credible when delivered by a victim or an amphetamine-intoxicated witness

Can personality close the intention-behavior gap for healthy eating? An examination with the HEXACO personality traits

The aim of this study was to investigate the predictive and moderating effects of HEXACO personality factors, in addition to theory of planned behavior (TPB) variables, on fruit and vegetable consumption. American college students (N = 1036) from 24 institutions were administered the TPB, HEXACO and a self-reported fruit and vegetable consumption measure. The TPB predicted 11–17% of variance in fruit and vegetable consumption, with greater variance accounted for in healthy weight compared to overweight individuals. Personality did not significantly improve the prediction of behavior above TPB constructs; however, conscientiousness was a significant incremental predictor of intention in both healthy weight and overweight/obese groups. While support was found for the TPB as an important predictor of fruit and vegetable consumption in students, little support was found for personality factors. Such findings have implications for interventions designed to target students at risk of chronic disease

Determining motivation to engage in safe food handling behaviour

Purpose: To apply the protection motivation theory to safe food handling in order to determine the efficacy of this model for four food handling behaviours: cooking food properly, reducing cross-contamination, keeping food at the correct temperature and avoiding unsafe foods. Design: A cross-sectional approach was taken where all protection motivation variables: perceived severity, perceived vulnerability, self-efficacy, response efficacy, and protection motivation, were measured at a single time point. Findings: Data from 206 participants revealed that the model accounted for between 40 and 48% of the variance in motivation to perform each of the four safe food handling behaviours. The relationship between self-efficacy and protection motivation was revealed to be the most consistent across the four behaviours. Implications: While a good predictor of motivation, it is suggested that protection motivation theory is not superior to other previously applied models, and perhaps a model that focuses on self-efficacy would offer the most parsimonious explanation of safe food handling behaviour, and indicate the most effective targets for behaviour change interventions. Originality: This is the first study to apply and determine the efficacy of protection motivation theory in the context of food safety

New Australian guidelines for the treatment of alcohol problems: an overview of recommendations

Summary of recommendations and levels of evidence Chapter 2: Screening and assessment for unhealthy alcohol use Screening Screening for unhealthy alcohol use and appropriate interventions should be implemented in general practice (Level A), hospitals (Level B), emergency departments and community health and welfare settings (Level C). Quantity–frequency measures can detect consumption that exceeds levels in the current Australian guidelines (Level B). The Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) is the most effective screening tool and is recommended for use in primary care and hospital settings. For screening in the general community, the AUDIT-C is a suitable alternative (Level A). Indirect biological markers should be used as an adjunct to screening (Level A), and direct measures of alcohol in breath and/or blood can be useful markers of recent use (Level B). Assessment Assessment should include evaluation of alcohol use and its effects, physical examination, clinical investigations and collateral history taking (Level C). Assessment for alcohol-related physical problems, mental health problems and social support should be undertaken routinely (GPP). Where there are concerns regarding the safety of the patient or others, specialist consultation is recommended (Level C). Assessment should lead to a clear, mutually acceptable treatment plan which specifies interventions to meet the patient’s needs (Level D). Sustained abstinence is the optimal outcome for most patients with alcohol dependence (Level C). Chapter 3: Caring for and managing patients with alcohol problems: interventions, treatments, relapse prevention, aftercare, and long term follow-up Brief interventions Brief motivational interviewing interventions are more effective than no treatment for people who consume alcohol at risky levels (Level A). Their effectiveness compared with standard care or alternative psychosocial interventions varies by treatment setting. They are most effective in primary care settings (Level A). Psychosocial interventions Cognitive behaviour therapy should be a first-line psychosocial intervention for alcohol dependence. Its clinical benefit is enhanced when it is combined with pharmacotherapy for alcohol dependence or an additional psychosocial intervention (eg, motivational interviewing) (Level A). Motivational interviewing is effective in the short term and in patients with less severe alcohol dependence (Level A). Residential rehabilitation may be of benefit to patients who have moderate-to-severe alcohol dependence and require a structured residential treatment setting (Level D). Alcohol withdrawal management Most cases of withdrawal can be managed in an ambulatory setting with appropriate support (Level B). Tapering diazepam regimens (Level A) with daily staged supply from a pharmacy or clinic are recommended (GPP). Pharmacotherapies for alcohol dependence Acamprosate is recommended to help maintain abstinence from alcohol (Level A). Naltrexone is recommended for prevention of relapse to heavy drinking (Level A). Disulfiram is only recommended in close supervision settings where patients are motivated for abstinence (Level A). Some evidence for off-label therapies baclofen and topiramate exists, but their side effect profiles are complex and neither should be a first-line medication (Level B). Peer support programs Peer-led support programs such as Alcoholics Anonymous and SMART Recovery are effective at maintaining abstinence or reductions in drinking (Level A). Relapse prevention, aftercare and long-term follow-up Return to problematic drinking is common and aftercare should focus on addressing factors that contribute to relapse (GPP). A harm-minimisation approach should be considered for patients who are unable to reduce their drinking (GPP). Chapter 4: Providing appropriate treatment and care to people with alcohol problems: a summary for key specific populations Gender-specific issues Screen women and men for domestic abuse (Level C). Consider child protection assessments for caregivers with alcohol use disorder (GPP). Explore contraceptive options with women of reproductive age who regularly consume alcohol (Level B). Pregnant and breastfeeding women Advise pregnant and breastfeeding women that there is no safe level of alcohol consumption (Level B). Pregnant women who are alcohol dependent should be admitted to hospital for treatment in an appropriate maternity unit that has an addiction specialist (GPP). Young people Perform a comprehensive HEEADSSS assessment for young people with alcohol problems (Level B). Treatment should focus on tangible benefits of reducing drinking through psychotherapy and engagement of family and peer networks (Level B). Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples Collaborate with Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander health workers, organisations and communities, and seek guidance on patient engagement approaches (GPP). Use validated screening tools and consider integrated mainstream and Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander-specific approaches to care (Level B). Culturally and linguistically diverse groups Use an appropriate method, such as the “teach-back” technique, to assess the need for language and health literacy support (Level C). Engage with culture-specific agencies as this can improve treatment access and success (Level C). Sexually diverse and gender diverse populations Be mindful that sexually diverse and gender diverse populations experience lower levels of satisfaction, connection and treatment completion (Level C). Seek to incorporate LGBTQ-specific treatment and agencies (Level C). Older people All new patients aged over 50 years should be screened for harmful alcohol use (Level D). Consider alcohol as a possible cause for older patients presenting with unexplained physical or psychological symptoms (Level D). Consider shorter acting benzodiazepines for withdrawal management (Level D). Cognitive impairment Cognitive impairment may impair engagement with treatment (Level A). Perform cognitive screening for patients who have alcohol problems and refer them for neuropsychological assessment if significant impairment is suspected (Level A). Summary of key recommendations and levels of evidence Chapter 5: Understanding and managing comorbidities for people with alcohol problems: polydrug use and dependence, co-occurring mental disorders, and physical comorbidities Polydrug use and dependence Active alcohol use disorder, including dependence, significantly increases the risk of overdose associated with the administration of opioid drugs. Specialist advice is recommended before treatment of people dependent on both alcohol and opioid drugs (GPP). Older patients requiring management of alcohol withdrawal should have their use of pharmaceutical medications reviewed, given the prevalence of polypharmacy in this age group (GPP). Smoking cessation can be undertaken in patients with alcohol dependence and/or polydrug use problems; some evidence suggests varenicline may help support reduction of both tobacco and alcohol consumption (Level C). Co-occurring mental disorders More intensive interventions are needed for people with comorbid conditions, as this population tends to have more severe problems and carries a worse prognosis than those with single pathology (GPP). The Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10 or K6) is recommended for screening for comorbid mental disorders in people presenting for alcohol use disorders (Level A). People with alcohol use disorder and comorbid mental disorders should be offered treatment for both disorders; care should be taken to coordinate intervention (Level C). Physical comorbidities Patients should be advised that alcohol use has no beneficial health effects. There is no clear risk-free threshold for alcohol intake. The safe dose for alcohol intake is dependent on many factors such as underlying liver disease, comorbidities, age and sex (Level A). In patients with alcohol use disorder, early recognition of the risk for liver cirrhosis is critical. Patients with cirrhosis should abstain from alcohol and should be offered referral to a hepatologist for liver disease management and to an addiction physician for management of alcohol use disorder (Level A). Alcohol abstinence reduces the risk of cancer and improves outcomes after a diagnosis of cancer (Level A)

The Long-term impact of oxaliplatin chemotherapy on rodent cognition and peripheral neuropathy

Chemotherapy treatment is associated with cognitive dysfunction in cancer survivors after treatment completion. The duration of these impairments is unclear. Therefore this paper aims to evaluate the lasting impact of varying doses of the chemotherapy oxaliplatin (OX) on cognition and peripheral neuropathy. In Experiment 1 rats were treated once a week for 3 weeks with either physiological saline (control) or 6. mg/kg OX i.p. and were assessed for peripheral neuropathy, using von Frey filaments, and cognitive function, using novel object and location recognition, up to 2 weeks after treatment completion. For Experiment 2 rats received 3 weekly i.p. injections of either physiological saline (control), 0.6. mg/kg, 2. mg/kg or 6. mg/kg OX and assessed for peripheral neuropathy and cognitive function up to 11 months after treatment completion. Systemic OX treatment induced lasting effects on cognitive function at 11 months after treatment, and peripheral neuropathy at 1 month after treatment and these were dose dependent; higher doses of OX resulted in worse cognitive outcomes and more severe peripheral neuropathy.9 page(s

Police as experts in the detection of alcohol and other drug intoxication: a review of the scientific evidence within the Australian legal context

Alcohol and Other Drug (\u27AOD\u27) use is prevalent in Australia and worldwide, and is frequently a factor in many crimes. Police are often required to assess whether an individual is relevantly intoxicated. This article reviews the current laws and research surrounding intoxication detection by police, with a focus on Australia. It finds that legislation governing criminal law and police powers offers little guidance, and training in intoxication assessment appears to be underdeveloped. It concludes that assumptions of police expertise in AOD intoxication detection should be viewed with caution. Further research is required into the adequacy of initial and continuing police training, and into the practices employed by police officers on the streets, at the police station, and in the courtroom

No evidence that alcohol intoxication impairs judgments of learning in face recognition

Alcohol use is frequently involved in crime, making it crucial to understand the role of alcohol in facial recognition to maximize correct perpetrator identifications. Although the majority of the alcohol and face recognition research has investigated recognition with retrospective confidence judgments, we examined the effects of alcohol intoxication on face recognition with prospective metacognitive judgments. Participants (N=54 university students without a history of hazardous alcohol/substance use) consumed either alcohol (mean breath alcohol concentration of 0.06 at pretest and 0.07 at post-test) or a non-alcoholic placebo drink. Participants then studied unfamiliar male and female faces and made judgments of learning (JOLs) for each face (i.e., predicted the likelihood of recognizing that face on a future memory test). After a brief distractor task, participants completed an old-new recognition test on which they attempted to distinguish the studied faces from new faces. It was found that the alcohol manipulation had minimal effect on face recognition performance or judgments of learning. Our results suggest that theory-based cues about the effects of alcohol might play a greater role in retrospective judgments than prospective judgments. Although not a primary focus of the study, face recognition was better for male faces than female faces, and this occurred for both female and male participants. Limitations and implications of the research are discussed

No evidence that alcohol intoxication impairs judgments of learning in face recognition

Alcohol use is frequently involved in crime, making it crucial to understand the role of alcohol in facial recognition to maximize correct perpetrator identifications. Although the majority of the alcohol and face recognition research has investigated recognition with retrospective confidence judgments, we examined the effects of alcohol intoxication on face recognition with prospective metacognitive judgments. Participants (N=54 university students without a history of hazardous alcohol/substance use) consumed either alcohol (mean breath alcohol concentration of 0.06 at pretest and 0.07 at post-test) or a non-alcoholic placebo drink. Participants then studied unfamiliar male and female faces and made judgments of learning (JOLs) for each face (i.e., predicted the likelihood of recognizing that face on a future memory test). After a brief distractor task, participants completed an old-new recognition test on which they attempted to distinguish the studied faces from new faces. It was found that the alcohol manipulation had minimal effect on face recognition performance or judgments of learning. Our results suggest that theory-based cues about the effects of alcohol might play a greater role in retrospective judgments than prospective judgments. Although not a primary focus of the study, face recognition was better for male faces than female faces, and this occurred for both female and male participants. Limitations and implications of the research are discussed