Relationship between work performance and personality traits in Hong Kong organizational settings

Four hundred and thirty-seven employees from four Hong Kong organizations completed the Traditional Chinese versions of the Fifteen Factor Personality Questionnaire Plus (15FQ+) and the Cross-Cultural Personality Assessment Inventory (CPAI-2) (indigenous scales) and provided objective and memory-based recent performance appraisal scores. A number of significant bivariate correlations were found between personality and performance scores. Hierarchical multiple regression analyses revealed that a number of the scales from the 15FQ+ contributed to significantly predicting four of the performance competency dimensions, but that the CPAI-2 indigenous scales contributed no incremental validity in performance prediction over and above the 15FQ+. Results are discussed in the light of previous research and a call made for continued research to further develop and increase the reliability of the Chinese instruments used in the study and to enable generalization of the findings with confidence.

The rising tide of ocean diseases: Unsolved problems and research priorities

New studies have detected a rising number of reports of diseases in marine organisms such as corals, molluscs, turtles, mammals, and echinoderms over the past three decades. Despite the increasing disease load, microbiological, molecular, and theoretical tools for managing disease in the world's oceans are underdeveloped. Review of the new developments in the study of these diseases identifies five major unsolved problems and priorities for future research: (1) detecting origins and reservoirs for marine diseases and tracing the flow of some new pathogens from land to sea; (2) documenting the longevity and host range of infectious stages; (3) evaluating the effect of greater taxonomic diversity of marine relative to terrestrial hosts and pathogens; (4) pinpointing the facilitating role of anthropogenic agents as incubators and conveyors of marine pathogens; (5) adapting epidemiological models to analysis of marine disease.

Public and private psychiatry: Can they work together and is it worth the effort?

Objective: Partnerships in mental health care, particularly between public and private psychiatric services, are being increasingly recognized as important for optimizing patient management and the efficient organization of services. However, public sector mental health services and private psychiatrists do not always work well together and there seem to be a number of barriers to effective collaboration. This study set out to investigate the extent of collaborative 'shared care' arrangements between a public mental health service and private psychiatrists practising nearby. It also examined possible barriers to collaboration and some possible solutions to the identified problems. Method: A questionnaire examining the above factors was sent to all public sector mental health clinicians and all private psychiatrists in the area. Results: One hundred and five of the 154 (68.2%) public sector clinicians and 103 of the 194 (53.1%) private psychiatrists returned surveys. The main barriers to successful collaboration identified by members of both sectors were: 'Difficulty communicating' endorsed by 71.4% of public clinicians and 72% of private psychiatrists, 'Confusion of roles and responsibilities' endorsed by 62.9% and 66%, respectively, and 'Different treatment approach' by 47.6% and 45.6%, respectively. Over 60% of private psychiatrists identified problems with access to the public system as a barrier to successful shared care arrangements. It also emerged, as hypothesized, that the public and private systems tend to manage different patient populations and that public clinicians in particular are not fully aware of the private psychiatrists' range of expertise. This would result in fewer referrals for shared care across the sectors. Conclusions: A number of barriers to public sector clinicians and private psychiatrists collaborating in shared care arrangements were identified. The two groups surveyed identified similar barriers. Some of these can potentially be addressed by changes to service systems. Others require cultural shifts in both sectors. Improved communications including more opportunities for formal and informal meetings between people working in the two sectors would be likely to improve the understanding of the complementary sector's perspective and practice. Further changes would be expected to require careful work between the sectors on training, employment and practice protocols and initiatives, to allow better use of the existing services and resources.