Developing a policy game intervention to enhance collaboration in public health policymaking in three European countries.

BACKGROUND: One of the key elements to enhance the uptake of evidence in public health policies is stimulating cross-sector collaboration. An intervention stimulating collaboration is a policy game. The aim of this study was to describe the design and methods of the development process of the policy game 'In2Action' within a real-life setting of public health policymaking networks in the Netherlands, Denmark and Romania. METHODS: The development of the policy game intervention consisted of three phases, pre intervention, designing the game intervention and tailoring the intervention. RESULTS: In2Action was developed as a role-play game of one day, with main focus to develop in collaboration a cross-sector implementation plan based on the approved strategic local public health policy. CONCLUSIONS: This study introduced an innovative intervention for public health policymaking. It described the design and development of the generic frame of the In2Action game focusing on enhancing collaboration in local public health policymaking networks. By keeping the game generic, it became suitable for each of the three country cases with only minor changes. The generic frame of the game is expected to be generalizable for other European countries to stimulate interaction and collaboration in the policy process.

Attitudes towards war, killing, and punishment of children among young people in Estonia, Finland, Romania, the Russian Federation, and the USA.

OBJECTIVE: To study the cultural differences in moral disengagement, which lends support to attitudes used to justify violence. METHODS: We carried out classroom surveys of a total of 3122 students in the USA (Houston, TX, and Washington, DC) and in four European countries--Estonia (Tartu), Finland (Helsinki), Romania (Satu Mare) and the Russian Federation (St Petersburg). Data were also taken from a random sample telephone survey of 341 young adults (aged 18-35 years) in Texas, USA. Ten distinct groups were studied. Seven questions were common to all the surveys, using identical statements about the participants' agreement with attitudes relating to war, diplomacy, killing, and the punishment of children. FINDINGS: The US students were more likely than those in Europe to agree with the following statements: "War is necessary" (20% vs 9%), "A person has the right to kill to defend property" (54% vs 17%), and "Physical punishment is necessary for children" (27% vs 10%). Justification of war and killing was less common among females than males in all groups; other differences within the US groups and the European groups were smaller than the differences between the US and European groups. CONCLUSION: The results confirm the gap between the US and European groups in moral disengagement attitudes and tendencies that could lead to deadly violence.