Constructing case vignettes for evaluating clinical judgment: An empirical model

Studies of clinical judgment are frequently based on analogue research, which uses experimenter-controlled stimuli to elicit judgments. The stimuli may be live models, audio- or video-taped models, or written case vignettes describing a clinical encounter. A major challenge of analogue research is to construct stimuli that maintain a balance between experimental rigor and clinical reality. An ideal set of case vignettes, for example, will contain summaries that resemble actual case histories and that are varied only on the specific clinical factors being studied. The model presented here demonstrates the empirical development of written case analogues in which several variables are studied simultaneously. The model can be adapted to any setting in which professionals are required to make judgments or decisions about individuals. The vignettes described here have been used in a variety of clinical settings to assess the reliability of clinicians'judgments and to aid in evaluation and program planning.     

Rating Threat Mitigators: Faith in Experts,Governments, and Individuals Themselves to Create a Safer World

This research explores public judgments about the threat-reducing potential of experts, individual behavior, and government spending. The data are responses of a national sample of 1225 to mail surveys that include measures of several dimensions of public judgments about violent crime, automobile accidents, hazardous chemical waste, air pollution, water pollution, global warming, AIDS, heart disease, and cancer. Beliefs about who can best mitigate threats are specific to classes of threats. In general, there is little faith that experts can do much about violent crime and automobile accidents, moderate faith in their ability to address problems of global warming, and greater expectations for expert solutions to the remaining threats. People judge individual behavior as effective in reducing the threats of violent crime, AIDS, heart disease, and automobile accidents but less so for the remaining threats. Faith in more government spending is highest for AIDS and the other two health items, lowest for the trio of violent crime, automobile accidents, and global warming, and moderate for the remaining threats. For most threats, people are not distributed at the extremes in judging mitigators. Strong attitudinal and demographic cleavages are also lacking, although some interesting relationships occur. This relative lack of sharp cleavages and the generally moderate opinion indicate ample opportunity for public education and risk communication.     

Social distress theory and teaching about homelessness: A retrospective analysis

This paper provides a retrospective analysis of our course: Homelessness in the United States: An Interdisciplinary Approach. It analyzes how such a course reveals social distress on two distinct levels: course content and course process. We deploy the concepts, tenets and insights of social distress theory to provide a retrospective analytical framework for the course. In addition, we extend the theory by presenting two corollaries to it and show how the literature on homelessness provides alternative connections among the major elements of social distress theory. Thus, we raise new questions for the theory to consider. We also make recommendations for potential teachers of courses on homelessness.     

The Persistence of a Stigmatized Practice: A Study of Competitive Intelligence

Studies on the diffusion of practices provide valuable insights into how organizations adopt, adapt, sustain and abandon practices over time. However, few studies focus on how stigmatized practices diffuse and persist, even when they risk tainting the adopters. To address this issue and understand how firms manage stigmatized practices, we study US organizations associated with the practice of competitive intelligence (CI) between 1985 and 2012. CI includes legitimate information gathering practices that are sometimes also associated with infringements and espionage. Our findings suggest that CI became highly diffused and persisted despite the risk of stigmatizing its adopters. We identified three factors to explain CI's persistence: (1) keeping it opaque to avoid the negative effects of stigmatization, (2) ‘constructing’ usefulness to justify its ongoing use by leveraging accepted beliefs and invoking fear of unilateral abandonment and (3) adapting it by developing multiple versions to increase its zone of acceptability. These three factors contribute to practice persistence by allowing firms to dilute the potential stigma from use of the practice. Our contribution lies in explaining the adoption, diffusion and ongoing use of a stigmatized practice whose benefits cannot be overtly acknowledged or made public.     

Cash‐for‐care policy in Sweden: An appraisal of its consequences on female employment

In 2008, Sweden introduced a cash‐for‐care benefit consisting of a flat‐rate sum paid by municipalities to parents whose children were between the ages of one and three and who did not use publicly subsidised childcare. The main object of the reform was to increase parents’ ‘freedom to choose’, but the policy was criticised because of its potentially negative effects on gender equality and mothers’ employment. This study focuses on the effects of cash‐for‐care on female employment in Sweden. The study shows that the adoption of this policy had negative effects on female employment, although primarily in rural areas. Cash‐for‐care was abolished in Sweden in 2016. To evaluate the effects that the policy had on female employment during the time it was in place is important as it indicates what may happen if the policy is introduced again.