Editorial

This issue of the Journal contains three interesting articlesabout central aspects of public opinion research, as well asan equal number of research notes that reflect the range oftopics that interest all public opinion researchers. Toshio Takeshita takes a turn at reconceptualizing agenda-settingstudies, using a taxonomy     

Examining the “Blanket of Protection” Conferred by Inoculation: The Effects of Inoculation Messages on the Cross-protection of Related Attitudes

Although the effectiveness of inoculation as a strategy for promoting resistance to attitude change is fairly well established, the potential of inoculation messages to offer cross-protection for related, but untreated, attitudes warrants additional attention from scholars. The reported study tested the “blanket of protection” conferred by inoculation. Participants (N = 118) were randomly assigned to read an inoculation message addressing a target topic and subsequently had their attitudes toward three related, but untreated, topics attacked. The results offer some evidence that inoculation messages can confer cross-protection for related attitudes. Participants in the inoculation condition reported greater perceptions of threat, greater counterarguing, and less attitude change in response to attacks than participants in the control condition for two of the three untreated topics. Counterarguing in response to attacks on untreated attitudes appears to be primarily responsible for cross-protection.     

Accuracy of activPAL Self-Attachment Methods

This study examined the accuracy of self-attachment of the activPAL activity monitor. A convenience sample of 50 participants self-attached the monitor after being presented with written material only (WMO) and then written and video (WV) instructions; and completed a questionnaire regarding the acceptability of the instructional methods. Participants positioned the monitor lower than the instructed position on the thigh (WMO ?5.15 ± 2.75 cm, WV ?4.16 ± 2.15 cm; p = .008 difference) and approximately 2 cm laterally from the thigh midline (WMO 1.90 ± 0.92 cm; WV 2.08 ± 1.24 cm). The orientation of the device was positioned correctly along the midline (within < 1° of vertical). Acceptability was high for both instructional methods although preference was shown for the WV instruction. In conclusion, participants consistently self-attached the activPAL close to the intended placement with either instructional method. The addition of video instruction produced a slightly more accurate attachment and was preferred by the participants.     

Access to human,animal, and environmental journals is still limited for the One Health community

Objective

“One Health” is an interdisciplinary approach to evaluating and managing the health and well-being of humans, animals, and the environments they share that relies on knowledge from the domains of human health, animal health, and the environmental sciences. The authors'' objective was to evaluate the extent of open access (OA) to journal articles in a sample of literature from these domains. We hypothesized that OA to articles in human health or environmental journals was greater than access to animal health literature.

Methods

A One Health seminar series provided fifteen topics. One librarian translated each topic into a search strategy and searched four databases for articles from 2011 to 2012. Two independent investigators assigned each article to human health, the environment, animal health, all, other, or combined categories. Article and journal-level OA were determined. Each journal was also assigned a subject category and its indexing evaluated.

Results

Searches retrieved 2,651 unique articles from 1,138 journals; 1,919 (72%) articles came from 406 journals that contributed more than 1 article. Seventy-seven (7%) journals dealt with all 3 One Health domains; the remaining journals represented human health 487 (43%), environment 172 (15%), animal health 141 (12%), and other/combined categories 261 (23%). The proportion of OA journals in animal health (40%) differed significantly from journals categorized as human (28%), environment (28%), and more than 1 category (29%). The proportion of OA for articles by subject categories ranged from 25%–34%; only the difference between human (34%) and environment (25%) was significant.

Conclusions

OA to human health literature is more comparable to animal health than hypothesized. Environmental journals had less OA than anticipated.Keywords (Medical Subject Headings) Publishing, Periodicals as Topic, Access to Information, Veterinary Medicine, Environment, Environmental Health, Medicine“One Health” is an integrated, transdisciplinary approach to solve complex problems at the diverse interfaces shared by humans, animals, and the environment [1]. The One Health approach to evaluating and managing the health and well-being of humans, animals, and the environments that they share relies on knowledge from the domains of human health, animal health, and the environmental sciences. Although there is a growing body of literature about the development of the One Health concept as documented by Pepper, Carrigan, Shurtz, and Foster [2], this literature is not the same as the combination of literature from the three domains that is applied in service of One Health. Every discipline related to One Health has its unique mindset and language, with corresponding lists of acronyms that are frequently an impediment to effective communication across the participating professions. Relevant papers guiding a One Health approach may never specifically use “One Health” as a term or concept.To promote better communication and collaboration among health professionals and environmental scientists, a public monthly One Health Intellectual Exchange Group (IEG) hosted by the North Carolina Biotechnology Center was launched in 2009. In 2011, faculty from the North Carolina State University College of Veterinary Medicine, University of North Carolina''s Gillings School for Global Public Health, Duke Global Health Institute, and Nicholas School of the Environment at Duke University expanded the IEG series into a weekly seminar course with eight One Health focus areas [3]. The eight focus area modules were the following: an introduction to One Health; environmental health and ecology; the human and animal bond; zoonoses and emerging infectious diseases; food and water safety; disease surveillance, informatics, and disaster preparedness; benefits of comparative medicine; and policy and education (Appendix A, online only). Each seminar speaker recommended papers to read prior to the session to provide a foundation for the topic because student backgrounds and majors were quite diverse. Represented student majors included master''s of public health, master''s of animal science, doctor of veterinary medicine, graduate-level environmental sciences, and undergraduate-level biochemistry, engineering, and biology.Open access (OA) to relevant literature is very important to scholars and practitioners working on interdisciplinary problems. The One Health Proof of Concept Workgroup found that few studies assess outcomes in human, animal, and environmental spheres simultaneously [4], making it important to be able to access articles from each of the three domains to get a more complete picture.The objective of this study was to evaluate the extent of OA to journal articles in a sample of literature relevant to One Health from the human, animal, and environmental domains. Working in a college of veterinary medicine and supporting faculty, staff, and students addressing interdisciplinary problems under the One Health umbrella [5], the authors were familiar with the extent of OA in human biomedical and public health literature and the literature of veterinary medicine but were less familiar with environmental journals. In light of general availability of environmental information and OA to publications such as Environmental Health Perspectives, we thought it likely that environmental literature would be relatively open compared to the other subject areas. Therefore, we hypothesized OA to articles from human health or environmental journals was greater than access to animal health literature. We chose to look at article-level subject categorization and access, as well as journal-level categorization and access, because they might differ. Article-level access relates more to authors'' decisions about OA for a content domain, while journal-level access and subject categorization are driven by publishers and associations. Understanding the distinction and having data would inform our efforts to promote increased OA to this literature.     

Progress monitoring with objective measures of writing performance for students with mild disabilities

To adequately monitor progress in writing, a test must show stability and demonstrate a performance profile over time that parallels those of accepted criterion measures. This study investigated the technical adequacy of seven objective indexes of writing quality in monitoring the progress of 36 middle school (Grades 6-8) students with mild disabilities over a 6-month period. The stability of each index was assessed. Holistic ratings of the same writing samples and the Test of Written Language served as validation criteria. Three indexes were moderately correlated with holistic ratings, but were not sufficiently stable over time. Direct, objective writing assessment must be used with caution for progress monitoring, given our present lack of precision in measuring the complex task of writing.     

Prenatal parenthood

In this article, we discuss the intuitive knowledge mothers have of their unborn baby. We propose a shift in focus from caregivers' merely providing information to first listening to pregnant mothers as they share their intuitive knowledge of their baby. This approach enables mothers and fathers or partners to know they are already parents to their unborn baby and empowers them to get in touch with their baby's presence and who he or she is during pregnancy. This intuitive knowledge may be a protective behavior that will enable mothers to keep babies safe during pregnancy.     

Forming, Losing, Renewing, and Replacing Friendships: Applying Temporal Parameters to the Assessment of Children's Friendship Experiences

Friendship formation and dissolution were tracked over time in a summer camp to examine whether such events are valid indicators of individual differences in children's friendship adjustment. Subjects were 216 children ages 8–15 years. Sociometric nominations were used to determine the identities of reciprocal friends. Loneliness at camp was also tracked over time. In addition, data on group acceptance, behavioral reputations, social competence, and behavioral problems were gathered from peers and counselors. Analyses suggested that friendship formation and duration were coherent, independent dimensions of individual differences and distinct from the overall extensivity of involvement in friendships. Regression analyses indicated that the temporal parameters of participation in friendship enhanced the prediction of changes in loneliness at camp. Age and sex differences in temporal parameters were explored, and 4 discrete trajectories for friendship involvement were identified. Children with different trajectories differed in their behavioral profiles from one another and from children who were chronically friendless.