Knowing a donor and identifying as one : determinants of people's willingness for related and anonymous living donation in Australia

While LRD (living donation to a genetically/emotionally related recipient) is well established in Australia, LAD (living anonymous donation to a stranger) is rare. Given the increasing use of LAD overseas, Australia may likely follow suit. Understanding the determinants of people’s willingness for LAD is essential but infrequently studied in Australia. Consequently, we compared the determinants of people’s LRD and LAD willingness, and assessed whether these determinants differed according to type of living donation. We surveyed 487 health students about their LRD and LAD willingness, attitudes, identity, prior experience with blood and organ donation, deceased donation preference, and demographics. We used Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) to identify the determinants of willingness for LRD and LAD and paired sample t-tests to examine differences in LRD and LAD attitudes, identity, and willingness. Mean differences in willingness (LRD 5.93, LAD 3.92), attitudes (LRD 6.43, LAD 5.53), and identity (LRD 5.69, LAD 3.58) were statistically significant. Revised SEM models provided a good fit to the data (LRD: x2 (41) = 67.67, p = 0.005, CFI = 0.96, RMSEA = 0.04; LAD: x2 (40) = 79.64, p < 0.001, CFI = 0.95, RMSEA = 0.05) and explained 45% and 54% of the variation in LRD and LAD willingness, respectively. Four common determinants of LRD and LAD willingness emerged: identity, attitude, past blood donation, and knowing a deceased donor. Religious affiliation and deceased donation preference predicted LAD willingness also. Identifying similarities and differences in these determinants can inform future efforts aimed at understanding people’s LRD and LAD willingness and the evaluation of potential living donor motives. Notably, this study highlights the importance of people’s identification as a living donor as a motive underlying their willingness to donate their organs while living.

Determining the psychosocial predictors of living, living-related, and posthumous organ donation

The worldwide organ shortage occurs despite people’s positive organ donation attitudes. The discrepancy between attitudes and behaviour is evident in Australia particularly, with widespread public support for organ donation but low donation and communication rates. This problem is compounded further by the paucity of theoretically based research to improve our understanding of people’s organ donation decisions. This program of research contributes to our knowledge of individual decision making processes for three aspects of organ donation: (1) posthumous (upon death) donation, (2) living donation (to a known and unknown recipient), and (3) providing consent for donation by communicating donation wishes on an organ donor consent register (registering) and discussing the donation decision with significant others (discussing). The research program used extended versions of the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) and the Prototype/Willingness Model (PWM), incorporating additional influences (moral norm, self-identity, organ recipient prototypes), to explicate the relationship between people’s positive attitudes and low rates of organ donation behaviours. Adopting the TPB and PWM (and their extensions) as a theoretical basis overcomes several key limitations of the extant organ donation literature including the often atheoretical nature of organ donation research, thefocus on individual difference factors to construct organ donor profiles and the omission of important psychosocial influences (e.g., control perceptions, moral values) that may impact on people’s decision-making in this context. In addition, the use of the TPB and PWM adds further to our understanding of the decision making process for communicating organ donation wishes. Specifically, the extent to which people’s registering and discussing decisions may be explained by a reasoned and/or a reactive decision making pathway is examined (Stage 3) with the novel application of the TPB augmented with the social reaction pathway in the PWM. This program of research was conducted in three discrete stages: a qualitative stage (Stage 1), a quantitative stage with extended models (Stage 2), and a quantitative stage with augmented models (Stage 3). The findings of the research program are reported in nine papers which are presented according to the three aspects of organ donation examined (posthumous donation, living donation, and providing consent for donation by registering or discussing the donation preference). Stage One of the research program comprised qualitative focus groups/interviews with university students and community members (N = 54) (Papers 1 and 2). Drawing broadly on the TPB framework (Paper 1), content analysed responses revealed people’s commonly held beliefs about the advantages and disadvantages (e.g., prolonging/saving life), important people or groups (e.g., family), and barriers and motivators (e.g., a family’s objection to donation), related to living and posthumous organ donation. Guided by a PWM perspective, Paper Two identified people’s commonly held perceptions of organ donors (e.g., altruistic and giving), non-donors (e.g., self-absorbed and unaware), and transplant recipients (e.g., unfortunate, and in some cases responsible/blameworthy for their predicament). Stage Two encompassed quantitative examinations of people’s decision makingfor living (Papers 3 and 4) and posthumous (Paper 5) organ donation, and for registering and discussing donation wishes (Papers 6 to 8) to test extensions to both the TPB and PWM. Comparisons of health students’ (N = 487) motivations and willingness for living related and anonymous donation (Paper 3) revealed that a person’s donor identity, attitude, past blood donation, and knowing a posthumous donor were four common determinants of willingness, with the results highlighting students’ identification as a living donor as an important motive. An extended PWM is presented in Papers Four and Five. University students’ (N = 284) willingness for living related and anonymous donation was tested in Paper Four with attitude, subjective norm, donor prototype similarity, and moral norm (but not donor prototype favourability) predicting students’ willingness to donate organs in both living situations. Students’ and community members’ (N = 471) posthumous organ donation willingness was assessed in Paper Five with attitude, subjective norm, past behaviour, moral norm, self-identity, and prior blood donation all significantly directly predicting posthumous donation willingness, with only an indirect role for organ donor prototype evaluations. The results of two studies examining people’s decisions to register and/or discuss their organ donation wishes are reported in Paper Six. People’s (N = 24) commonly held beliefs about communicating their organ donation wishes were explored initially in a TPB based qualitative elicitation study. The TPB belief determinants of intentions to register and discuss the donation preference were then assessed for people who had not previously communicated their donation wishes (N = 123). Behavioural and normative beliefs were important determinants of registering and discussing intentions; however, control beliefs influenced people’s registering intentions only. Paper Seven represented the first empirical test of the role of organ transplant recipient prototypes (i.e., perceptions of organ transplant recipients) in people’s (N = 465) decisions to register consent for organ donation. Two factors, Substance Use and Responsibility, were identified and Responsibility predicted people’s organ donor registration status. Results demonstrated that unregistered respondents were the most likely to evaluate transplant recipients negatively. Paper Eight established the role of organ donor prototype evaluations, within an extended TPB model, in predicting students’ and community members’ registering (n = 359) and discussing (n = 282) decisions. Results supported the utility of an extended TPB and suggested a role for donor prototype evaluations in predicting people’s discussing intentions only. Strong intentions to discuss donation wishes increased the likelihood that respondents reported discussing their decision 1-month later. Stage Three of the research program comprised an examination of augmented models (Paper 9). A test of the TPB augmented with elements from the social reaction pathway in the PWM, and extensions to these models was conducted to explore whether people’s registering (N = 339) and discussing (N = 315) decisions are explained via a reasoned (intention) and/or social reaction (willingness) pathway. Results suggested that people’s decisions to communicate their organ donation wishes may be better explained via the reasoned pathway, particularly for registering consent; however, discussing also involves reactive elements. Overall, the current research program represents an important step toward clarifying the relationship between people’s positive organ donation attitudes but low rates of organ donation and communication behaviours. Support has been demonstrated for the use of extensions to two complementary theories, the TPB and PWM, which can inform future research aiming to explicate further the organ donation attitude-behaviour relationship. The focus on a range of organ donation behaviours enables the identification of key targets for future interventions encouraging people’s posthumous and living donation decisions, and communication of their organ donation preference.

Working in groups

This chapter is a condensation of a guide written by the chapter authors for both university teachers and students (Fowler et al., 2006). All page references given in this chapter are to this guide, unless otherwise stated. University students often work in groups. It may be a formal group (i.e. one that has been formed for a group presentation, writing a report, or completing a project) or an informal group (i.e. some students have decided to form a study group or undertake research together). Whether formal or informal, this chapter aims to make working in groups easier for you. Health care professionals also often work in groups. Yes, working in groups will extend well beyond your time at university. In fact, the skills and abilities to work effectively in groups are some of the most sought-after attributes in health care professionals. It seems obvious, then, that taking the opportunity to develop and enhance your skills and abilities for working in groups is a wise choice.

A comparison of the hazard perception ability of matched groups of healthy drivers aged 35 to 55, 65 to 74, and 75 to 84 years

We examined differences in response latencies obtained during a validated video-based hazard perception driving test between three healthy, community-dwelling groups: 22 mid-aged (35-55 years), 34 young-old (65-74 years), and 23 old-old (75-84 years) current drivers, matched for gender, education level, and vocabulary. We found no significant difference in performance between mid-aged and young-old groups, but the old-old group was significantly slower than the other two groups. The differences between the old-old group and the other groups combined were independently mediated by useful field of view (UFOV), contrast sensitivity, and simple reaction time measures. Given that hazard perception latency has been linked with increased crash risk, these results are consistent with the idea that increased crash risk in older adults could be a function of poorer hazard perception, though this decline does not appear to manifest until age 75+ in healthy drivers.

Demographic category membership and leadership in small groups : a social identity analysis

Developing the social identity theory of leadership (e.g., [Hogg, M. A. (2001). A social identity theory of leadership. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5, 184–200]), an experiment (N=257) tested the hypothesis that as group members identify more strongly with their group (salience) their evaluations of leadership effectiveness become more strongly influenced by the extent to which their demographic stereotype-based impressions of their leader match the norm of the group (prototypicality). Participants, with more or less traditional gender attitudes (orientation), were members, under high or low group salience conditions (salience), of non-interactive laboratory groups that had “instrumental” or “expressive” group norms (norm), and a male or female leader (leader gender). As predicted, these four variables interacted significantly to affect perceptions of leadership effectiveness. Reconfiguration of the eight conditions formed by orientation, norm and leader gender produced a single prototypicality variable. Irrespective of participant gender, prototypical leaders were considered more effective in high then low salience groups, and in high salience groups prototypical leaders were more effective than less prototypical leaders. Alternative explanations based on status characteristics and role incongruity theory do not account well for the findings. Implications of these results for the glass ceiling effect and for a wider social identity analysis of the impact of demographic group membership on leadership in small groups are discussed.

Critique groups : a technique for the author’s toolbox?

With a lack of places to gain an education in the craft of romance writing, novelists have few places to turn to gain real feedback. This paper investigates an alternative to textbooks, conferences, and workshops through an examination of the role provided to the writer by critique groups. How these groups work, how they benefit an author, and the critique groups as a whole are discussed. This work studies the form of Peer Assessment and Learning (PAL) and compares the technique used by educational institutions all over the world with the practice of author groups critiquing their own work. The research shows how a critique group can assist a writer to learn, grow and develop, helping to enhance the writer’s skills through constructive feedback, which gives them confidence to sell their work.

Indigenous men's support groups and social and emotional wellbeing : a meta-synthesis of the evidence

Indigenous men’s support groups are designed to empower men to take greater control and responsibility for their health and wellbeing. They provide health education sessions, counselling, men’s health clinics, diversionary programs for men facing criminal charges, cultural activities, drug- and alcohol-free social events, and advocacy for resources. Despite there being ~100 such groups across Australia, there is a dearth of literature on their strategies and outcomes. This paper is based on participatory action research involving two north Queensland groups which were the subject of a series of five ‘phased’ evaluative reports between 2002 and 2007. By applying ‘meta-ethnography’ to the five studies, we identified four themes which provide new interpretations of the data. Self-reported benefits included improved social and emotional wellbeing, modest lifestyle modifications and willingness to change current notions of ‘gendered’ roles within the home, such as sharing housework. Our qualitative research to date suggests that through promoting empowerment, wellbeing and social cohesion for men and their families, men’s support groups may be saving costs through reduced expenditure on health care, welfare, and criminal justice costs, and higher earnings. Future research needs to demonstrate this empirically.