Exploring emotions in dialog between health provider,parent and child. An observational study in pediatric primary care

IntroductionThis paper is part of the theoretical thread of health psychology and it presents a study aimed to recognize information useful to implement psychological interventions finalized to personalize medical treatments and engage users in pediatrics.ObjectiveIn this paper is presented an observational study aimed to explore doctor-patient dialog about worries in pediatric primary care; it has been carried out identifying dialogical interaction patterns, or typical dialog between health providers, parent and child.MethodWe documented conversations in 265 visits; we audio-recordered, transcribed and analyzed them with Verona Coding Definitions of Emotional Sequences. Dialogs between participants were analyzed one by one. Frequencies of emotions’ signals (cues/concerns) and responses were analyzed through Redundancy Analysis, aimed to establish a quantitative relationship between these pair of groups of variables considering the asymmetrical relationship between them.ResultsSix “Dialogical Interaction Patterns” were obtained by interpreting these relationships; they show dialogs mainly aimed at obtaining information useful for diagnosis and treatment, with a limited exploration of worries or issues related to the condition of the child. Pediatric conversations seem to be characterized by a very high attention to cognitive aspects of medical questions with a poor consideration of emotions as useful information to medical practice.ConclusionsThese dialogs seem to ensure the rapidity and the efficiency of medical visits. Nevertheless, it could be useful to implement psychological interventions to achieve an enrichment of the dialog between participants, helping them to recognize users’ emotions as useful to define shared medical strategies.     

Associations between self-rated health and the assessments of anchoring vignettes in cardiovascular patients

Background/ObjectiveAssessments of health can be biased by response shift effects. One method for detecting such effects is the use of anchoring vignettes. The aim of this study was to analyze the relationship between participants’ self-assessed health state and their assessments of these vignettes.MethodA total of 342 cardiovascular patients assessed their own state of health on a 0-100 visual analogue scale. The patients additionally assessed two vignettes featuring fictional persons suffering from specific complaints. A sample of the general population (N = 1,236) served as controls.ResultsThe participants rated the health state of the vignette character featuring physical problems as being significantly better than the general population did (effect size: d = 0.53). The group difference in the assessment of the vignette featuring primarily mental health problems was lower (d = -0.17). Participants’ assessments of the vignettes were positively correlated with their assessments of their own health state (r = .26 and r = .10) and with several quality of life variables.ConclusionsAnchoring vignettes are a useful tool for detecting response shift effects.     

La qualité de la relation leader/membre et les comportements innovants : le rôle modérateur de la résistance au changement

Researchers have proposed that high quality of supervisor–employee relationships (Basu & Green, 1997; Scott & Bruce, 1994; Sanders, Moorkamp, Torka, Groeneveld & Groeneveld, 2010) fosters innovative behaviour. Moreover, researchers have acknowledged that this relationship is not clear (Rosing, Frese & Bausch, 2011; Volmer, Spurk & Niessen, 2012). The present study aims at testing the moderating role of resistance to change in the LMX-innovative behaviour relationship. Results of a study based on 160 participants from an organization provide empirical support to this hypothesis.     

When saying no leads to compliance: The door-in-the-face technique for changing attitudes and behaviors towards smoking at work

IntroductionThe aim of this action research was to encourage workers to comply with an anti-smoking charter and get them to effectively reduce their tobacco use. Two change procedures were compared: a classic one based on an information campaign and an original one based on the door-in-the-face technique.MethodForty-three smoking workers participated in this study. They were assigned to one of the two groups: information campaign group or door-in-the-face group. Two types of measures were administered. The first assessed self-reported attitudes towards smoking, such as perceived dependence (Fagerström Test); the second assessed effective behavior, such as number of cigarettes smoked and physiological nicotine addiction.ConclusionTaken together, the results show that the door-in-the-face technique was more effective than the information campaign. These results are discussed in light of the social acceptability of the initial refusal.     

The meaning of the h-index

The h-index originates from the assumption that the number of citations received by a scientist is a better indicator of the relevance of his or her work than the number of papers he or she publishes or the journals where they are published. It takes into account the number of papers published and the citations to those papers in a balanced way, and thus is useful to make comparisons between scientists. The present paper addresses the most frequent questions about the h-index. Specifically, it explains its origin, its advantages compared to other indices, the factors that can influence it (e.g. age, field of knowledge, topic of research and language of publication), its variants, and the injustices it may lead to. In short, this paper provides a clear exposition of the hoped-for role of the h-index in the evaluation of scientists: that it serves as a useful complement to other indicators that are more subjective, and that it contributes to the progress of science by aiding decision-making on allocation of research resources in a more effective way, and on rewarding researchers who contribute to scientific progress in a more fair way.