Pain Assessment and Management in the Long-Term Care Setting

The assessment and management of pain is a significant public health problem in the United States. Long-term care facilities face unique barriers and challenges to pain management due to the large population of cognitively impaired residents, little physician contact and poor pain education for nurses and nurse assistants. In addition, common misconceptions about pain and pain treatment in the elderly along with health professional and resident fears of addiction and drug toxicity, add to the problem of pain management. The basic principles of pain treatment in long-term care are identical to all other health care settings – utilizing a combination of drug and non-drug treatments. Recent efforts to institutionalize improved pain management practices, through assessment procedures and defined pain management policies, standards and education programming, is a promising venue for systemically improving pain treatment in long-term care settings.     

Streamlining experiment data manipulation with psychology experiment data interchange format (PXDIF)

The use of small computers to automate psychology experiments has raised a number of development and logistical problems that interrupt the smooth flow of work from hypotheses to conclusions and publication. Currently, the outstanding bottleneck is the tedious and error-prone manipulation of raw experiment data in preparation for use in commercial data visualization and statistics packages. This problem is addressed by a self-describing data format PXDIF. Companion software can perform most needed manipulations automatically or with minimal experimenter involvement.     

Lightness differences and the perceived segregation of regions and populations

A striking finding reported by Beck, Sutter, and Ivry (1987) was that, in textures composed of regions differentiated by the arrangement (checks and stripes) of two texture elements (light and dark squares), a large lightness difference between the squares could fail to yield segregation between the regions, whereas a smaller lightness difference could sometimes yield strong segregation. In the experiments reported here, we compared the segregation of striped and checked arrangements of light and dark squares into regions with the segregation of two randomly interspersed populations of light and dark squares into subpopuiations. Perceived lightnesses are the same for a given set of squares, whether they are arranged in regions or in intermixed populations. Perceived population segregation is approximately a single-valued function of the lightness differences of the squares, but perceived region segregation is not. The reason for the difference between population segregation and region segregation may be that region segregation is mediated by detectors’ having large oriented receptive fields (large bar detectors) that are sensitive to the fundamental spatial frequency and orientation of the texture region as defined by the arrangement of the squares (Beck et al., 1987; Sutter, Beck, & Graham, 1989). These detectors cannot be responsible for population segregation, because the light and dark squares are distributed randomly throughout these patterns and therefore do not define a consistent arrangement of any particular spatial frequency or orientation. The light and dark squares in the population patterns fall equally on excitatory and inhibitory regions of large bar detectors. A plausible explanation for population segregation is to suppose that the segregation is the result of similarity grouping of the light and dark squares.     

In defense of Southern Fundamentalism

The order of authorship is the reverse of the order of a previous paper by the same authors. The paper is a thoroughly collaborative project. We are grateful to a number of people for comments on earlier drafts, most especially Denny Bradshaw, Peter Clark, David Henderson, Harold Kincaid, Georges Rey, John Tienson, and an anonymous referee. The second author also wishes to thank the Centre for Philosophy and Public Affairs, Department of Moral Philosophy, University of St. Andrews, Scotland, and its award of a Tennent Caledonian Research Fellowship, which helped to fund his work on this paper.     

Proxemics,locus of control,anxiety, and type of movement in emotionally disturbed and normal boys

In order to determine the interpersonal distancing requirements for emotionally disturbed and normal children and in order to investigate the relationship of locus of control and anxiety to interpersonal space, 20 emotionally disturbed and 20 normal boys were randomly required to approach an object person and to let the object person approach them until they felt uncomfortable. Results indicated that emotionally disturbed boys required more space than normals; that subjects would approach closer than they would allow the object person to approach them; and that externals required more space than internals. There were no significant differences between high and low anxious subjects, nor between emotionally disturbed children diagnostically classified as overanxious reaction and those with other diagnosis. Finally, neither anxiety nor locus of control explained the significant normal—emotionally disturbed differences in space requirements. Theoretical and practical implications were discussed as well as the relationship between the present and previous research.     

A cross-cultural study of the communication of extra-verbal meaning by gestures(1)

English and Italian encoders were asked to communicate two-dimensional shapes to decoders of their own culture, with and without the use of hand gestures, for materials of high and low verbal codability. The decoders drew what they thought the shapes were and these were rated by English and Italian judges, for similarity to the originals. Higher accuracy scores were obtained by both the English and the Italians, when gestures were allowed, for materials of both high and low codability; but the effect of using gestures was greater for materials of low codability. Improvement in performance when gestures were allowed was greater for the Italians than for the English for both levels of codability. An analysis of the recorded verbal utterances has shown that the detriment in communication accuracy with the elimination of gestures cannot be attributed to disruption of speech performance; rather, changes in speech content occur indicating an increased reliance on verbal means of conveying spatial information. Nevertheless, gestures convey this kind of semantic information more accurately and evidence is provided for the gestures of the Italians communicating this information more effectively than those of the English.