Escaping the Cage of Ethno-National Conflict in Northern Ireland: The Importance of Transnational Networks

co-author; Cathal McCall

Overcoming health inequalities: A participative evaluation framework fit for the task

Aims: Healthcare providers are confronted with the claim that the distribution of health and healthcare provision is inherently unfair. There is also a growing awareness that the tools and methodologies applied in tackling health inequalities require further development. Evaluations as well as interventions usually focus on population-based indicators, but do not always provide guidance for frontline service evaluation and delivery. That is why the evaluation framework presented here focuses on facilitating local service development, service provider and user involvement, and the adequate representation of different population groups. Methods: A participative evaluation framework was constructed by drawing on six common success characteristics extrapolated from the published literature and policies on health inequalities. This framework was then applied to an intervention addressing women’s psychosocial health needs in order to demonstrate its utility in practice. Results: The framework provides healthcare professionals with an evidence-based tool for evaluating projects or programmes targeting health inequalities in ways that are responsive to local contexts and stakeholders. Conclusion: This participative evaluation framework supports the identification of meaningful psychosocial and contextual indicators for assessing the diverse health and social needs of service users. It uses multi-dimensional indicators to assess health and social care needs, to inform local service development, and to facilitate the exchange of knowledge between researchers, service providers, and service users. The inherent responsiveness enables rigorous yet flexible action on local health inequalities.

Dual-task interference: Attentional and neurophysiological influences

Performing two tasks simultaneously often degrades performance of one or both tasks. While this dual-task interference is classically interpreted in terms of shared attentional resources, where two motor tasks are performed simultaneously interactions within primary motor cortex (i.e., activity-dependent coupling) may also be a contributing factor. In the present study TMS (transcranial magnetic stimulation) was used to examine the contribution of activity-dependent coupling to dual-task interference during concurrent performance of a bimanual coordination task and a discrete probe reaction time (RT) task involving the foot. Experiments 1 and 2 revealed that activity-dependent coupling within the leg corticomotor pathway was greater during dual-task performance than single-task performance, and this was associated with interference on the probe RT task (i.e., increased RT). Experiment 3 revealed that dual-task interference occurred regardless of whether the dual-task involved two motor tasks or a motor and cognitive task, however activity-dependent coupling was present only when a dual motor task was performed. This suggests that activity-dependent coupling is less detrimental to performance than attentional processes operating upstream of the corticomotor system. Finally, while prioritising the RT task reduced, but did not eliminate, dual-task interference the contribution of activity-dependent coupling to dual-task interference was not affected by task prioritisation. This suggests that although activity-dependent coupling may contribute to dual motor-task interference, attentional processes appear to be more important. It also suggests that activity-dependent coupling may not be subject to modulation by attentional processes. (C) 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Deciding between accounts of the selection task: A reply to Oaksford (2002)

In this paper we report on our attempts to fit the optimal data selection (ODS) model (Oaksford Chater, 1994; Oaksford, Chater, & Larkin, 2000) to the selection task data reported in Feeney and Handley (2000) and Handley, Feeney, and Harper (2002). Although Oaksford (2002b) reports good fits to the data described in Feeney and Handley (2000), the model does not adequately capture the data described in Handley et al. (2002). Furthermore, across all six of the experiments modelled here, the ODS model does not predict participants' behaviour at the level of selection rates for individual cards. Finally, when people's probability estimates are used in the modelling exercise, the model adequately captures only I out of 18 conditions described in Handley et al. We discuss the implications of these results for models of the selection task and claim that they support deductive, rather than probabilistic, accounts of the task.

Alternative antecedents, probabilities, and the suppression of fallacies in Wason's selection task

Three experiments examined the influence of a second rule on the pattern of card selections on Wason's selection task. In Experiment 1 participants received a version of the task with a single test rule or one of two versions of the task with the same original test rule together with a second rule. The probability of q was manipulated in the two-rules conditions by varying the size of the antecedent set in the second rule. The results showed a significant suppression of q card and not-p card selections in the alternative-rule conditions, but no difference as a function of antecedent set size. In Experiment 2 the size of the antecendent set in the two-rules conditions was manipulated using the context of a computer printing double-sided cards. The results showed a significant reduction of q card selections in the two-rules conditions, but no effect of p set size. In Experiment 3 the scenario accompanying the rule was manipulated, and it specified a single alternative antecedent or a number of alternative antecedents. The q card selection rates were not affected by the scenario manipulation but again were suppressed by the presence of a second rule. Our results suggest that people make inferences about the unseen side of the cards when engaging with the task and that these inferences are systematically influenced by the presence of a second rule, but are not influenced by the probabilistic characteristics of this rule. These findings are discussed in the context of decision theoretic views of selection task performance (Oaksford Chater, 1994).