Brief interventions to reduce ecstasy use : a multi-site randomized controlled trial

Studies examining the ability of motivational enhancement therapy (MET) to augment education provision among ecstasy users have produced mixed results and none have examined whether treatment fidelity was related to ecstasy use outcomes. The primary objectives of this multi-site, parallel, two-group randomized controlled trial were to determine if a single-session of MET could instill greater commitment to change and reduce ecstasy use and related problems more so than an education-only intervention and whether MET sessions delivered with higher treatment fidelity are associated with better outcomes. The secondary objective was to assess participants’ satisfaction with their assigned interventions. Participants (N = 174; Mage = 23.62) at two Australian universities were allocated randomly to receive a 15-minute educational session on ecstasy use (n = 85) or a 50-minute session of MET that included an educational component (n = 89). Primary outcomes were assessed at baseline, and then at 4-, 16-, and 24-weeks post-baseline, while the secondary outcome measure was assessed 4-weeks post-baseline by researchers blind to treatment allocation. Overall, the treatment fidelity was acceptable to good in the MET condition. There were no statistical differences at follow-up between the groups on the primary outcomes of ecstasy use, ecstasy-related problems, and commitment to change. Both interventions groups reported a 50% reduction in their ecstasy use and a 20% reduction in the severity of their ecstasy-related problems at the 24-week follow up. Commitment to change slightly improved for both groups (9% - 17%). Despite the lack of between-group statistical differences on primary outcomes, participants who received a single session of MET were slightly more satisfied with their intervention than those who received education only. MI fidelity was not associated with ecstasy use outcomes. Given these findings, future research should focus on examining mechanisms of change. Such work may suggest new methods for enhancing outcomes.

Setting the agenda, influencing public opinion, and advocating for social change

This study seeks to contribute to the systematic explanation of journalists’ professional role orientations. Focusing on three aspects of journalistic interventionism – the importance of setting the political agenda, influencing public opinion and advocating for social change – multilevel analyses found substantive variation in interventionism at the individual level of the journalist, the level of the media organizations, and the societal level. Based on interviews with 2100 journalists from 21 countries, findings affirm theories regarding a hierarchy of influences in news work. We found journalists to be more willing to intervene in society when they work in public media organizations and in countries with restricted political freedom. An important conclusion of our analysis is that journalists’ professional role orientations are also rooted within perceptions of cultural and social values. Journalists were more likely to embrace an interventionist role when they were more strongly motivated by the value types of power, achievement and tradition.

A little learning is a dangerous thing: Factors influencing the increased identification of special educational needs from the perspective of education policymakers and school practitioners

This article considers the increased identification of special educational needs in Australia’s largest education system from the perspectives of senior public servants, regional directors, principals, school counsellors, classroom teachers, support class teachers, learning support teachers and teaching assistants (n = 30). While their perceptions of an increase generally align with the story told by official statistics, participants’ narratives reveal that school-based identification of special educational needs is neither art nor science. This research finds that rather than an objective indication of the number and nature of children with SEN, official statistics may be more appropriately viewed as a product of funding eligibility and the assumptions of the adults who teach, refer and assess children who experience difficulties in school and with learning.