Nancy Ellen Kiernan

Social Support for Healthy Behaviors: Scale Psychometrics and Prediction of Weight Loss Among Women in a Behavioral Program

Social support could be a powerful weight‐loss treatment moderator or mediator but is rarely assessed. We assessed the psychometric properties, initial levels, and predictive validity of a measure of perceived social support and sabotage from friends and family for healthy eating and physical activity (eight subscales). Overweight/obese women randomized to one of two 6‐month, group‐based behavioral weight‐loss programs (N = 267; mean BMI 32.1 ± 3.5; 66.3% White) completed subscales at baseline, and weight loss was assessed at 6 months. Internal consistency, discriminant validity, and content validity were excellent for support subscales and adequate for sabotage subscales; qualitative responses revealed novel deliberate instances not reflected in current sabotage items. Most women (>75%) “never” or “rarely” experienced support from friends or family. Using nonparametric classification methods, we identified two subscales—support from friends for healthy eating and support from family for physical activity—that predicted three clinically meaningful subgroups who ranged in likelihood of losing ≥5% of initial weight at 6 months. Women who “never” experienced family support were least likely to lose weight (45.7% lost weight) whereas women who experienced both frequent friend and family support were more likely to lose weight (71.6% lost weight). Paradoxically, women who “never” experienced friend support were most likely to lose weight (80.0% lost weight), perhaps because the group‐based programs provided support lacking from friendships. Psychometrics for support subscales were excellent; initial support was rare; and the differential roles of friend vs. family support could inform future targeted weight‐loss interventions to subgroups at risk.

Is a Web Survey as Effective as a Mail Survey? A Field Experiment Among Computer Users.

With the exponential increase in Web access, program evaluators need to understand the methodological benefits and barriers of using the Web to collect survey data from program participants. In this experimental study, the authors examined whether a Web survey can be as effective as the more established mail survey on three measures of survey effectiveness: response rate, question completion rate, and the lack of evaluative bias. Community- and university-based educators (n = 274) attending a 2-day program were randomly assigned to receive a Web or mail survey evaluating the program. Among those participants successfully solicited by e-mail, Web survey participants were more likely to respond (95%) than mail survey participants (79%). Web survey participants completed similarly high numbers of quantitative questions as mail survey participants, provided longer and more substantive responses to qualitative questions, and did not demonstrate evidence of evaluative bias. These results suggest that program evaluators could expand their use of Web surveys among computer users.

Assessing the subsequent effect of a formative evaluation on a program

The literature on formative evaluation focuses on its conceptual framework, methodology and use. Permeating this work is a consensus that a program will be strengthened as a result of a formative evaluation although little empirical evidence exists in the literature to demonstrate the subsequent effects of a formative evaluation on a program. This study begins to fill that gap. To do this, we outline the initial program and formative evaluation, present key findings of the formative evaluation, describe how these findings influenced the final program and summative evaluation, and then compare the findings to those of the formative. The study demonstrates that formative evaluation can strengthen the implementation and some impacts of a program, i.e. knowledge and some behaviors. The findings also suggest that when researchers are faced with negative feedback about program components in a formative evaluation, they need to exercise care in interpreting and using this feedback.

Meeting the ‘multi-’ requirements in organic agriculture research: Successes, challenges and recommendations for multifunctional, multidisciplinary, participatory projects

Organic farming is one of the fastest growing agricultural sectors worldwide, and funds to support research and extension activities that address the needs of organic producers are becoming more widely available in the USA. Solutions to problems in ecologically complex systems, such as organic farming systems often exceed the expertise of individual investigators or single disciplines. Further, the complex nature of ecological and social interactions within systems-based agricultural research requires not only more emphasis on information exchange but also synthesis between multidisciplinary teams of academic researchers and organic farmers. Accordingly, federal grant agencies that support organic agriculture research increasingly require that projects encompass multiple academic disciplines, multiple functions (research, outreach, education), and the participation of stakeholders for the ultimate purpose of the integration of knowledge. Many researchers, educators and administrators at land grant universities (LGUs) remain inexperienced in multidisciplinary, multifunctional and participatory research. Using post-completion project interviews of the project investigators on an organic transition project, we identified eight factors that affected the integration of knowledge from a farmer advisory board and the conduct of our multidisciplinary, participatory organic transition project. The first five factors include shared values, balance in technical competence, institutional capacity for research, team capacity for problem solving and institutional resistance. The research team also identified three other factors that evoked confusion and divergence during the project, and include the ambiguity of power and control of knowledge, the proposed experimental plan and terms of team engagement. We considered participatory elements of the project according to Biggs’ linear typology of participation, but found more appropriate Neef and Neuberts position that a linear scale of participatory approach is an inadequate framework for helping agricultural scientists to decide on whether and in which phases they want to, can and should incorporate participatory elements into their research projects. From these findings, we conclude with critical issues for academic research and extension teams to consider during the development and before conduct of these types of projects. We also offer recommendations for LGUs and other research institutions, and funding organizations, to facilitate multidisciplinary, multifunctional, participatory research.

The Pennsylvania Central Region Farm Safety Pilot Project: Part I - Rationale and Baseline Results

The Pennsylvania Central Region Farm Safety Pilot Project (PACRFSPP) is an agricultural safety and health project designed to test three interventions to reduce hazards and risks of farm work. The interventions represent distinct operational approaches to farm safety and health education and farm risk reduction. This article (a) introduces details on the projects overall rationale and objectives; and (b) presents preliminary findings from baseline data collected prior to the start of interventions.

Using distance education to educate and empower community coalitions: a case study.

This article focuses on a community activism program about the issue of youth tobacco control across fourteen communities. The article highlights an interesting and innovative methodology to provide staff development workshops to each community site where participants received consistent messages with preparation for coalition building and local action planning to address youth tobacco control issues. The article concludes with recommendations for educators considering the use of distance education technologies to educate and empower collective activism in a limited time period.

An improved model for professional conferences and workshops

A cooperative learning method designed to increase learning and other benefits to participants is presented. Small group problem-solving from case studies or story narratives provides a way to overcome the limitations of conventional lecture presentations. An example that used a case study in small groups during a breakout session at a scientific conference to improve skills in intervention design and research evaluation is described.

The Pennsylvania Central Region Farm Safety Pilot Project: Part II - Baseline Data Associations Between Approach-to-Safety and Hazard Conditions

This article analyzes baseline data associations between farmers? approach-to-safety and hazard conditions on their farms. Identifying which aspects of approach-to-safety are significantly associated with actual hazard conditions will help researchers design and implement more effective educational interventions. Baseline data on 216 different farms in the Pennsylvania Central Region Farm Safety Pilot Project (PCRFSPP) were collected through the use of a self-administered survey questionnaire of the farmers? approach-to-safety and a hazard audit (by a trained auditor) of participating farms. Factor analysis was used to determine construct validity of the questionnaire. To measure the reliability of the survey, Cronbachs alpha was calculated for each component in the questionnaire. After adjusting for significant demographics (farm size, income, and hired labor) in a linear regression, greater concern by farm operators for absence of safety features was significantly associated with less hazardous conditions. These results provide useful guidelines for designing and implementing agricultural safety interventions by identifying which factors are significantly related to hazard conditions.