Health promotion planning: An educational and environmental approach : Lawrence W. Green and Marshall W. Kreuter Mayfield Publishing, Mountain View, California, 2nd edn.

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/30012/1/0000380.pd

Predictors of use of hearing protection among a representative sample of farmers

Farmers experience higher rates of noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) than workers in most other industries. We developed a model of farmers' use of hearing protection, and tested it with a random sample ( n  = 532) of farmers from the upper Midwest. Barriers to using hearing protection (e.g., difficulty communicating; OR  = .44, p  < .003) were negatively related to use. Greater access/availability of hearing protectors ( OR  = 1.75, p  < .010) and male gender ( OR  = .43, p  < .019) were positively related to use. The model correctly predicted use of hearing protection for 74% of the cases. Overall, farmers demonstrated low hearing protector use, and results were similar to those from previous studies of non-farm workers. Findings from this study will be useful in designing interventions to increase farmers' hearing protector use and decrease their rates of NIHL. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Res Nurs Health 33:528–538, 2010Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/78292/1/20410_ftp.pd

Effectiveness of an Intervention to Increase Construction Workers' Use of Hearing Protection

In this project we tested the effectiveness of a theory-based intervention (video, pamphlets, and guided practice session) to increase the use of hearing protection devices (HPDs) among Midwestern construction workers and a national group of plumber/pipefitter trainers. Posttest measures were collected 10--12 months following this intervention. Pender's Health Promotion Model (1987) provided the conceptual basis for development of the training program. A total of 837 highnoise- exposed workers were included in the analysis: 652 regional Midwestern construction workers and 185 national plumber/pipefitter trainers. Effectiveness of the intervention was determined through the sequence of analyses recommended by Braver and Braver (1988) for the Solomon Four-Group Design. Analysis of variance and covariance of postintervention use and intention to use HPDs and a meta-analytic test were done. These analyses indicated that the intervention significantly increased use of HPDs but had no effect on intention to use HPDs in the future. Pretesting had no effect on use. Actual or potential applications of this research include guidance in the development of successful theorybased interventions to increase use of HPDs.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/68025/2/10.1518_001872099779610969.pd

Correlates of Cooperation in a One-Shot High-Stakes Televised Prisoners' Dilemma

Explaining cooperation between non-relatives is a puzzle for both evolutionary biology and the social sciences. In humans, cooperation is often studied in a laboratory setting using economic games such as the prisoners' dilemma. However, such experiments are sometimes criticized for being played for low stakes and by misrepresentative student samples. Golden balls is a televised game show that uses the prisoners' dilemma, with a diverse range of participants, often playing for very large stakes. We use this non-experimental dataset to investigate the factors that influence cooperation when “playing” for considerably larger stakes than found in economic experiments. The game show has earlier stages that allow for an analysis of lying and voting decisions. We found that contestants were sensitive to the stakes involved, cooperating less when the stakes were larger in both absolute and relative terms. We also found that older contestants were more likely to cooperate, that liars received less cooperative behavior, but only if they told a certain type of lie, and that physical contact was associated with reduced cooperation, whereas laughter and promises were reliable signals or cues of cooperation, but were not necessarily detected

Test of the health promotion model as a causal model of construction workers' use of hearing protection

The health promotion model (HPM) was tested as a causal model of construction workers' use of hearing protection ( N = 359). Theoretical and exploratory models fit well, with the theoretical model accounting for 36.3% of variance and the exploratory model accounting for 50.6% of variance in hearing protection use. Value of use (benefits of using hearing protection), barriers to use, and self-efficacy were significant predictors in both the theoretical and exploratory models, but perceived health status was a predictor only in the theoretical model. In the exploratory model, where modifying factors were allowed direct relationships with use of hearing protection, two modifying factors—noise exposure and interpersonal influences-modeling—were significant predictors. Results of this test of the HPM are consistent with the revised HPM (Pender, 1996). There were significant direct paths from modifying factors to behavior. Use of hearing protection was best predicted by behavior-specific predictors, such as perceived barriers to use of hearing protection. Results support the use of the HPM to predict use of hearing protection. © 1997 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Res Nurs Health 20: 183–194, 1997Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/34674/1/2_ftp.pd

Comparison of the original and revised structures of the health promotion model in predicting construction workers' use of hearing protection The contents are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of the NIOSH.

Pender's health promotion model (HPM) has been revised, including substantial changes in its structure. The purpose of this study was to compare the fit and predictive usefulness of the original and revised structures of the HPM as applied to the use of hearing protection devices by 703 construction workers. Structural equation modeling was used to evaluate the two alternative forms of the model. Both forms of the model fit well, with the revised structure having a better fit and explaining more of the variance in use of hearing protection (28% vs. 18%). Results support the revised structure of the health promotion model (HPM) over the original form, and indicate it may be useful in understanding and predicting use of hearing protection. © 2006 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Res Nurs Health 29:3–17, 2006Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/49521/1/20111_ftp.pd