Procedural trained, procedural remain : the first report from 'A census of doctors who have been awarded the Graduate Diploma in Rural General Practice (GDRGP)'

Aims & rationale/Objectives : To document the practice of initial cohorts receiving the Graduate Diploma in Rural General Practice
Methods : With the co-operation of the National Rural Faculty (NRF) of Royal Australian College of General Practitioners (RACGP), a census by questionnaire was conducted on 279 graduates. The response rate was 70%.
Principal findings : The target doctors are young (65% < 40 years old). Under half (42.3%) have completed Advanced Rural Skills terms in >1 discipline. Of the total 272 posts recorded from 174 respondents, the most popular advanced skill is anaesthetics, followed by obstetrics. The ARSP increased confidence in 96.3% of respondents. Two thirds of doctors trained in a procedural skill remain practicing procedural General Practice.
Discussion : The GDRGP was the qualification developed to recognise competency gained as a result of a series of rural training initiatives begun within the RACGP Training Program in 1992. Its delivery has continued under the new GPET Training Program. Outcomes from the range of initiatives leading to the GDRGP are currently emerging in an environment which has seen significant changes within vocational training, and within the context of a rising focus on indemnity. Doctors who undertook this training have mostly retained procedural practice. In addition, RACGP rural initiatives successfully achieved increase confidence prior to rural work in advanced areas of practice, with >95% reporting an increase.
Implications : Changes within vocational training were accelerated without analysis of existing initiatives such as the GDRGP. Funding for the GDRGP was, as a result, withdrawn prematurely. These changes also saw the entrant of a second College with an interest in rural procedural practice. This research show that the GDRGP offers, and offered, a clear vocational pathway that will guide a doctor to a career as a rural doctor, and provide them with the advanced skills they need to practice confidently in the bush. It is important to capitalise on past success before deconstructing professional concepts of practice further.
Presentation type : Paper

Public relations, sophistry and the rhetoric of democracy

The intention of this paper is to explain the activities of public relations in terms of rhetorical theory and the history of sophistry. There is a burgeoning field of study in the US which is incorporating much cultural and communication theory into both historical and contemporary perspectives on these two ancient arts. Consequently, an examination of the purposive communication activities of public relations offers an opportunity to involve semiotics as a central concept for analysing the creation and maintenance of democratic thought and institutions. This paper highlights Peircean semiotics in this respect and suggests the relevance of Peirce's notion of the 'Pragmatic Maxim' and his use of the concept of 'habit' in terms of how public relations might be said to 'cast' the quality of the democracy which we experience.

Public relations and the rhetoric of civil society

The intention of this paper is to build on a book by Anne Surma (2005). It takes some of Surma’s ideas probably beyond what was originally intended in order to suggest their logical conclusions for the practice of public relations. Surma argues that writing and reading of every type enables or otherwise facilitates or restricts imagination. Further, this shaping or inflection of the imagination leads to the shaping or the inflection of the type of ‘ethic’ which we are able to hold in our heads about the world which surrounds us. If this is the case then public relations writing, which has the very raison d’etre of influencing thought, must lend itself to important analysis in this regard. This paper presumes the reader has a basic understanding of Charles Saunders Peirce’s notion of semiotics.

Public satisfaction with police : the importance of procedural justice and police performance in police-citizen encounters

A large body of literature has demonstrated that when authorities use procedural justice with those they regulate, people will be more satisfied with those authorities and will be more willing to cooperate and comply with their directions and rules. In the context of policing, procedural justice has also been shown to be important for shaping citizens’ views about police legitimacy, their satisfaction with police and also in fostering cooperation with police. What remains largely unexamined, however, is whether the positive effect of procedural justice varies across different types of police–citizen encounters. Using survey data collected from a national sample of 1,462 Australians, the present study will examine the relative importance of procedural justice on overall ratings of police satisfaction across two types of police–citizen encounters (citizen-initiated contacts and police-initiated contacts). It will be shown that procedural justice is most important in police-initiated contacts, while police performance is most important in citizen-initiated contacts.

Procedural justice and affect intensity : understanding reactions to regulatory authorities

Why is it that some people respond in a more negative way to procedural injustice than do others, and why is it that some people go on to defy authority while others in the same situation do not? Personality theorists suggest that the psychological effect of a situation depends on how a person interprets the situation and that such differences in interpretation can vary as a function of individual difference factors. For example, affect intensity—one’s predisposition to react more or less emotionally to an event—is one such individual difference factor that has been shown to influence people’s reactions to events. Cross-sectional survey data collected from (a) 652 tax offenders who have been through a serious law enforcement experience (Study 1), and (b) 672 citizens with recent personal contact with a police officer (Study 2), showed that individual differences in ‘affect intensity’ moderate the effect of procedural justice on both affective reactions and compliance behavior. Specifically, perceptions of procedural justice had a greater effect in reducing anger and reports of non-compliance among those lower in affect intensity than those higher in affect intensity. Both methodological and theoretical explanations are offered to explain the results, including the suggestion that emotions of shame may play a role in the observed interaction.

Nurturing regulatory compliance: Is procedural justice effective when people question the legitimacy of the law?

Procedural justice generally enhances an authority's legitimacy and encourages people to comply with an authority's decisions and rules. We argue, however, that previous research on procedural justice and legitimacy has examined legitimacy in a limited way by focusing solely on the perceived legitimacy of authorities and ignoring how people may perceive the legitimacy of the laws and rules they enforce. In addition, no research to date has examined how such perceptions of legitimacy may moderate the effect of procedural justice on compliance behavior. Using survey data collected across three different regulatory contexts – taxation (Study 1), social security (Study 2), and law enforcement (Study 3) – the findings suggest that one's perceptions of the legitimacy of the law moderates the effect of procedural justice on compliance behaviors; procedural justice is more important for shaping compliance behaviors when people question the legitimacy of the laws than when they accept them as legitimate. An explanation of these findings using a social distancing framework is offered, along with a discussion of the implications the findings have on enforcement.

Construction supply chain economic policy implementation for sectoral change : moving beyond the rhetoric

The improvement of the performance of the construction industry through the improved performance of the supply chains that make up the various sectors is a difficult task and one that has had considerable international debate (London, 2005). The idea of using the supply chain concept as a normative model to improve firm behaviour and thus ultimately industry performance through the development of supply chain clusters or integrated supply chains has been discussed in many public sector policy documents and in the academic research community since the late 1990s (London, 2005). However it has been difficult to see any real examples where this concept has had any major impact – or where the improvements have been measured and/or monitored.