Time to re-think rural development?

(2004) Time to re-think rural development? EuroChoices Vol. 3 No. 2 pp.33-40

Assessing synchrony in groups:Are you measuring what you think you are measuring?

Behavioural synchrony has been a popular topic of research in group living animals, but has so far lacked a standard approach. Previous studies have varied greatly in the number of behavioural states they have considered and the size of groups investigated. Here, a model of behavioural synchrony was used to test four measures of synchrony commonly used (proportion observations 100% conforming, mean proportion of conforming individuals, Ruckstuhl's group mean and the kappa coefficient). The model used scan samples of the behaviour of laying hens, originally categorised in 10 different behavioural states, as a basis for determining the agents' probability of performing behaviour states. We systematically varied the group size and the number of behavioural states in the model. The measures calculated from the behaviour of the model agents were compared against a synchrony factor that determined the 'motivation' of agents in the model to conform to the behaviour of other agents, for model runs with different group sizes and behavioural categories. The results of the model suggest that, of the measures considered, the kappa coefficient is the most suitable measure of synchrony. The kappa coefficient was the only measure of the four tested to control for expected levels of synchrony. Expected levels of synchrony are sensitive to both the number of behaviour states being examined and the size of the group, therefore observed levels of synchrony should be compared against expected levels to provide meaningful standardised measures. © 2012 Elsevier B.V.

Content validity of the Illness Perception Questionnaire-Revised for people with Type 2 Diabetes: A Think-Aloud study

Objectives: To access the cognitions of adults with type 2 diabetes whilst completing items on the Illness Perceptions Questionnaire – Revised (IPQ-R). To determine whether these cognitions are congruent with the meaning of items and subscales as interpreted by researchers and clinicians using the IPQ-R and to identify the nature and extent of problems that individuals experience when completing the IPQ-R.
Design: Participants (n=36) were recruited from a primary care diabetes clinic and a hospital diabetes clinic. They were asked to complete the IPQ-R using a ‘think-aloud’ methodology.
Main Outcome Measures: Transcripts were analysed to identify instances where participants expressed problems with item completion, or where there was inconsistency between verbal and written responses.
Results: The most problematic subscales were those of ‘personal control’ and ‘consequences’.
Conclusion: Generally, participants found the IPQ-R unproblematic. However, participants had problems with the concept of ‘cure’ and ‘symptoms’ in the context of type 2 diabetes, and with the negative phrasing used in some items. These findings have important implications for the interpretation of IPQ-R scores, particularly when the IPQ-R is used as the basis for individualised interventions among people with type 2 diabetes.