Psychometric qualities of the Brazilian versions of the Fagerstrom Test for Nicotine Dependence and the Heaviness of Smoking Index

This study examined the psychometric properties of the Brazilian versions of the Fagerstrom Test for Nicotine Dependence (FTND) and the Heaviness of Smoking Index (HSI). The test-retest reliability of the FTND was assessed in a sample of 61 smoking university students, with a 15-day interval between assessments. The interrater reliability was examined in 30 smoking patients of a psychosocial care center for alcohol and drug users (PCC-AD). The reliability coefficient was estimated by the kappa and intraclass correlation coefficients. The predictive validity, internal consistency, and factor structure of the FTND and the HSI were evaluated by factor analysis in 271 smokers treated at an emergency unit and at the PCC-AD. The gold standard was the nicotine dependence criteria of DSM-IV, as assessed by the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV. The FTND showed high reliability, with correlation coefficients of .92 for test-retest reliability and .99 for interrater reliability. Both the FTND and the HSI presented high levels of sensitivity and specificity. The internal consistency evaluation yielded a Cronbach`s alpha coefficient of .83 for the FTND and of .56 for the HSI. An exploratory factor analysis found 2 factors in the FTND, which were validated by a confirmatory factor analysis. The results obtained in this study confirm the validity and reliability of the Brazilian versions of the FTND and the HSI.

A Comparison of Bayesian and Sampling Theory Inferences in a Probit Model

HE PROBIT MODEL IS A POPULAR DEVICE for explaining binary choice decisions in econometrics. It has been used to describe choices such as labor force participation, travel mode, home ownership, and type of education. These and many more examples can be found in papers by Amemiya (1981) and Maddala (1983). Given the contribution of economics towards explaining such choices, and given the nature of data that are collected, prior information on the relationship between a choice probability and several explanatory variables frequently exists. Bayesian inference is a convenient vehicle for including such prior information. Given the increasing popularity of Bayesian inference it is useful to ask whether inferences from a probit model are sensitive to a choice between Bayesian and sampling theory techniques. Of interest is the sensitivity of inference on coefficients, probabilities, and elasticities. We consider these issues in a model designed to explain choice between fixed and variable interest rate mortgages. Two Bayesian priors are employed: a uniform prior on the coefficients, designed to be noninformative for the coefficients, and an inequality restricted prior on the signs of the coefficients. We often know, a priori, whether increasing the value of a particular explanatory variable will have a positive or negative effect on a choice probability. This knowledge can be captured by using a prior probability density function (pdf) that is truncated to be positive or negative. Thus, three sets of results are compared:those from maximum likelihood (ML) estimation, those from Bayesian estimation with an unrestricted uniform prior on the coefficients, and those from Bayesian estimation with a uniform prior truncated to accommodate inequality restrictions on the coefficients.

Bioeconomic analysis of aquaculture's impact on wild stocks and biodiversity

Anderson theorizes that development of the aquaculture of a species of fish (also captured in an open-access fishery) favours the conservation of its wild stocks, if competitive market conditions prevail. However, this theory is shown to be subject to significant limitations. While this is less so within his model, it is particularly so in an extended one outlined here. The extended model allows for the possibility that aquaculture development can impact negatively on wild stocks thereby shifting the supply curve of the capture fishery, or raise the demand for the fish species subject both to aquaculture and capture. Such development can threaten wild stocks and their biodiversity. While aquaculture development could in principle have no impact on the biodiversity of wild stocks or even raise aquatic biodiversity overall, its impact in the long-term probably will be one of reducing aquatic diversity both in the wild and overall.