Lessons learnt : complementing good clinical renal questions with an appropriate research strategy

The purpose of this article is to present lessons learnt by nurses when conducting research to encourage colleagues to ask good clinical research questions. This is accomplished by presenting a study designed to challenge current practice which included research flaws. The longstanding practice of weighing renal patients at 0600 hours and then again prior to receiving haemodialysis was examined. Nurses believed that performing the assessment twice, often within a few hours, was unnecessary and that patients were angry when woken to be weighed. An observational study with convenience sampling collected data from 46 individuals requiring haemodialysis, who were repeatedly sampled to provide 139 episodes of data. Although the research hypotheses were rejected, invaluable experience was gained, with research and clinical practice lessons learnt, along with surprising findings.

Teachers' personal epistemologies and teacher education : emergent themes and future research

This chapter summarizes the responses to four questions in each of the chapters in this volume. The questions addressed the use of a conceptual framework that guides the chapter, issues of domain-generality, how personal epistemology relates to teaching, and how personal epistemologies change. We concluded that all of the chapters discussed the distinction between constructivist and transmission teaching practices, while suggesting that there are many inconsistencies in understanding the relationship between the nature of beliefs and teachers’ practices regardless of the relative sophistication of teachers’ personal epistemologies. We also summarized a multi-component instructional model for calibrating teaching practices based on suggestions in each of the chapters, and made four suggestions for future research, including the need for an integrated theory that accounts for the development and manifestations of personal pistemology in the classroom, the generalizability of fi ndings across different measurements, a set of guidelines to promote teacher epistemological change, and an explicit instructional model that explains the development and calibration of beliefs and practices. The goal of this volume was to examine the relationship between teachers’ personal epistemologies and teacher education. Sixteen different chapters addressed one or more aspects of this issue. Although each of the chapters addressed different aspects of teachers’ personal epistemologies, a number of common themes are apparent across the chapters. We believe it is useful to articulate these themes in greater detail to provide a better retrospective understanding of this volume, as well as a better prospective framework for future research and changes to teacher training programs. We divide this chapter into two main sections. The fi rst section addresses four key questions about the nature of teachers’ personal epistemologies that were discussed in the introductory chapter as part of a larger set of questions. These questions focus on how to conceptualize these beliefs as explicit models; whether beliefs are domain-specifi c or domain-general; how beliefs are related to teaching; and how beliefs change over time. We provide a summary of each chapter in terms of these four questions. The second section proposes four general suggestions for future research based on the studies reported within this volume.

Doorway to research : Issues in the development of an interactive website for international graduate students

This paper describes results of a study evaluating the content, functionality and design features of an innovative online website called the Doorway to Research (http://rsc.acid.net.au/Main.aspx) , which was developed to support international graduate students studying at universities in Australia. First, the key features of the website are described. Second, the result of a pilot study involving 12 students and faculty members who tested key aspects of the design, content and functionality of the website and provided written and oral feedback base on task-based questions and focus group discussions are explored. Finally, recommendations for future development are presented. Results of the study indicate general student satisfaction with the website and its design, content and functionality, with specific areas identified for further development.

The desire for the construction industry to move towards lifecycle carbon emissions analysis

A significant reduction in carbon emissions is a global mission and the construction industry has an indispensable role to play as a major carbon dioxide (CO2) generator. Over the years, various building environmental assessment (BEA) models and concepts have been developed to promote environmentally responsible design and construction. However, limited attention has been placed on assessing and benchmarking the carbon emitted throughout the lifecycle of building facilities. This situation could undermine the construction industry’s potential to reduce its dependence on raw materials, recognise the negative impacts of producing new materials, and intensify the recycle and reuse process. In this paper, current BEA approaches adopted by the construction industry are first introduced. The focus of these models and concepts is then examined. Following a brief review of lifecycle analysis, the boundary in which a lifecycle carbon emission analysis should be set for a construction project is identified. The paper concludes by highlighting the potential barriers of applying lifecycle carbon emissions analysis in the construction industry. It is proposed that lifecycle carbon emission analysis can be integrated with existing BEA models to provide a more comprehensive and accurate evaluation on the cradle-to-grave environmental performance of a construction facility. In doing so, this can assist owners and clients to identify the optimum solution to maximise emissions reduction opportunities.

The psychosocial factors influencing aggressive driving behaviour

Many drivers in highly motorised countries believe that aggressive driving is increasing. While the prevalence of the behaviour is difficult to reliably identify, the consequences of on-road aggression can be severe, with extreme cases resulting in property damage, injury and even death. This research program was undertaken to explore the nature of aggressive driving from within the framework of relevant psychological theory in order to enhance our understanding of the behaviour and to inform the development of relevant interventions. To guide the research a provisional ‘working’ definition of aggressive driving was proposed encapsulating the recurrent characteristics of the behaviour cited in the literature. The definition was: “aggressive driving is any on-road behaviour adopted by a driver that is intended to cause physical or psychological harm to another road user and is associated with feelings of frustration, anger or threat”. Two main theoretical perspectives informed the program of research. The first was Shinar’s (1998) frustration-aggression model, which identifies both the person-related and situational characteristics that contribute to aggressive driving, as well as proposing that aggressive behaviours can serve either an ‘instrumental’ or ‘hostile’ function. The second main perspective was Anderson and Bushman’s (2002) General Aggression Model. In contrast to Shinar’s model, the General Aggression Model reflects a broader perspective on human aggression that facilitates a more comprehensive examination of the emotional and cognitive aspects of aggressive behaviour. Study One (n = 48) examined aggressive driving behaviour from the perspective of young drivers as an at-risk group and involved conducting six focus groups, with eight participants in each. Qualitative analyses identified multiple situational and person-related factors that contribute to on-road aggression. Consistent with human aggression theory, examination of self-reported experiences of aggressive driving identified key psychological elements and processes that are experienced during on-road aggression. Participants cited several emotions experienced during an on-road incident: annoyance, frustration, anger, threat and excitement. Findings also suggest that off-road generated stress may transfer to the on-road environment, at times having severe consequences including crash involvement. Young drivers also appeared quick to experience negative attributions about the other driver, some having additional thoughts of taking action. Additionally, the results showed little difference between males and females in the severity of behavioural responses they were prepared to adopt, although females appeared more likely to displace their negative emotions. Following the self-reported on-road incident, evidence was also found of a post-event influence, with females being more likely to experience ongoing emotional effects after the event. This finding was evidenced by ruminating thoughts or distraction from tasks. However, the impact of such a post-event influence on later behaviours or interpersonal interactions appears to be minimal. Study Two involved the quantitative analysis of n = 926 surveys completed by a wide age range of drivers from across Queensland. The study aimed to explore the relationships between the theoretical components of aggressive driving that were identified in the literature review, and refined based on the findings of Study One. Regression analyses were used to examine participant emotional, cognitive and behavioural responses to two differing on-road scenarios whilst exploring the proposed theoretical framework. A number of socio-demographic, state and trait person-related variables such as age, pre-study emotions, trait aggression and problem-solving style were found to predict the likelihood of a negative emotional response such as frustration, anger, perceived threat, negative attributions and the likelihood of adopting either an instrumental or hostile behaviour in response to Scenarios One and Two. Complex relationships were found to exist between the variables, however, they were interpretable based on the literature review findings. Factor analysis revealed evidence supporting Shinar’s (1998) dichotomous description of on-road aggressive behaviours as being instrumental or hostile. The second stage of Study Two used logistic regression to examine the factors that predicted the potentially hostile aggressive drivers (n = 88) within the sample. These drivers were those who indicated a preparedness to engage in direct acts of interpersonal aggression on the road. Young, male drivers 17–24 years of age were more likely to be classified as potentially hostile aggressive drivers. Young drivers (17–24 years) also scored significantly higher than other drivers on all subscales of the Aggression Questionnaire (Buss & Perry, 1992) and on the ‘negative problem orientation’ and ‘impulsive careless style’ subscales of the Social Problem Solving Inventory – Revised (D’Zurilla, Nezu & Maydeu-Olivares, 2002). The potentially hostile aggressive drivers were also significantly more likely to engage in speeding and drink/drug driving behaviour. With regard to the emotional, cognitive and behavioural variables examined, the potentially hostile aggressive driver group also scored significantly higher than the ‘other driver’ group on most variables examined in the proposed theoretical framework. The variables contained in the framework of aggressive driving reliably distinguished potentially hostile aggressive drivers from other drivers (Nagalkerke R2 = .39). Study Three used a case study approach to conduct an in-depth examination of the psychosocial characteristics of n = 10 (9 males and 1 female) self-confessed hostile aggressive drivers. The self-confessed hostile aggressive drivers were aged 24–55 years of age. A large proportion of these drivers reported a Year 10 education or better and average–above average incomes. As a group, the drivers reported committing a number of speeding and unlicensed driving offences in the past three years and extensive histories of violations outside of this period. Considerable evidence was also found of exposure to a range of developmental risk factors for aggression that may have contributed to the driver’s on-road expression of aggression. These drivers scored significantly higher on the Aggression Questionnaire subscales and Social Problem Solving Inventory Revised subscales, ‘negative problem orientation’ and ‘impulsive/careless style’, than the general sample of drivers included in Study Two. The hostile aggressive driver also scored significantly higher on the Barrett Impulsivity Scale – 11 (Patton, Stanford & Barratt, 1995) measure of impulsivity than a male ‘inmate’, or female ‘general psychiatric’ comparison group. Using the Carlson Psychological Survey (Carlson, 1982), the self-confessed hostile aggressive drivers scored equal or higher scores than the comparison group of incarcerated individuals on the subscale measures of chemical abuse, thought disturbance, anti-social tendencies and self-depreciation. Using the Carlson Psychological Survey personality profiles, seven participants were profiled ‘markedly anti-social’, two were profiled ‘negative-explosive’ and one was profiled as ‘self-centred’. Qualitative analysis of the ten case study self-reports of on-road hostile aggression revealed a similar range of on-road situational factors to those identified in the literature review and Study One. Six of the case studies reported off-road generated stress that they believed contributed to the episodes of aggressive driving they recalled. Intense ‘anger’ or ‘rage’ were most frequently used to describe the emotions experienced in response to the perceived provocation. Less frequently ‘excitement’ and ‘fear’ were cited as relevant emotions. Notably, five of the case studies experienced difficulty articulating their emotions, suggesting emotional difficulties. Consistent with Study Two, these drivers reported negative attributions and most had thoughts of aggressive actions they would like to take. Similarly, these drivers adopted both instrumental and hostile aggressive behaviours during the self-reported incident. Nine participants showed little or no remorse for their behaviour and these drivers also appeared to exhibit low levels of personal insight. Interestingly, few incidents were brought to the attention of the authorities. Further, examination of the person-related characteristics of these drivers indicated that they may be more likely to have come from difficult or dysfunctional backgrounds and to have a history of anti-social behaviours on and off the road. The research program has several key theoretical implications. While many of the findings supported Shinar’s (1998) frustration-aggression model, two key areas of difference emerged. Firstly, aggressive driving behaviour does not always appear to be frustration driven, but can also be driven by feelings of excitation (consistent with the tenets of the General Aggression Model). Secondly, while the findings supported a distinction being made between instrumental and hostile aggressive behaviours, the characteristics of these two types of behaviours require more examination. For example, Shinar (1998) proposes that a driver will adopt an instrumental aggressive behaviour when their progress is impeded if it allows them to achieve their immediate goals (e.g. reaching their destination as quickly as possible); whereas they will engage in hostile aggressive behaviour if their path to their goal is blocked. However, the current results question this assertion, since many of the hostile aggressive drivers studied appeared prepared to engage in hostile acts irrespective of whether their goal was blocked or not. In fact, their behaviour appeared to be characterised by a preparedness to abandon their immediate goals (even if for a short period of time) in order to express their aggression. The use of the General Aggression Model enabled an examination of the three components of the ‘present internal state’ comprising emotions, cognitions and arousal and how these influence the likelihood of a person responding aggressively to an on-road situation. This provided a detailed insight into both the cognitive and emotional aspects of aggressive driving that have important implications for the design of relevant countermeasures. For example, the findings highlighted the potential value of utilising Cognitive Behavioural Therapy with aggressive drivers, particularly the more hostile offenders. Similarly, educational efforts need to be mindful of the way that person-related factors appear to influence one’s perception of another driver’s behaviour as aggressive or benign. Those drivers with a predisposition for aggression were more likely to perceive aggression or ‘wrong doing’ in an ambiguous on-road situation and respond with instrumental and/or hostile behaviour, highlighting the importance of perceptual processes in aggressive driving behaviour.