Development of Systemic Interventions to Decrease Breast Cancer Risk: A Group Concept Mapping Study.

As breast cancer continues to take a devasting public health toll, most primary prevention approaches are targeted at individual actions. We have proposed, instead, developing systemic, population approaches to preventing the disease. We used a combined qualitative-quantitative methodology, group concept mapping (GCM), to identify Importance and Feasibility ratings of systemic interventions across a wide spectrum of approaches and stakeholders. Participants (n = 351) from across the state of California sorted 84 potential interventions into topical piles, and then rated each intervention on perceived Importance and Feasibility. Multidimensional scaling and a cluster analysis identified eleven clusters or themes of interventions. Participants rated interventions on Importance and Feasibility differently depending on the region of the state in which they lived. The results of this study underscore the importance of sharing health information with and seeking public health solutions from community partners in general and from beyond the urban areas usually studied.

Aggressor-victim dissent in perceived legitimacy of aggression in soccer: the moderating role of situational background.

The purpose of this study was to investigate the aggressor-victim difference in perceived legitimacy of aggression in soccer as a function of score information (tied, favorable, unfavorable), sporting penalization (no risk, yellow card, red card), and type of aggression (instrumental, hostile). French male soccer players (N = 133) read written scenarios and rated the legitimacy of the described aggressive act depending on a specific perspective (aggressor or victim) and situational information. A significant aggressor-victim difference in perception of instrumental aggression was found in situations where the score was tied or where there was no risk to be caught. In addition, aggressors were affected by such information, whereas victims were not. The discussion focuses on explanations and implications of such divergences in aggressive sport situations.

Apology in the criminal justice setting: evidence for including apology as an additional component in the legal system.

The criminal justice system has reached unprecedented scope in the United States, with over 6.4 million people under some type of supervision. Remedies that have the potential to reduce this number are continually being sought. This article analyzes an innovative strategy currently being reconsidered in criminal justice: the apology. Despite a legal system that only sporadically acknowledges it, evidence for the use of apology is supported by social science research, current criminal justice theories, case law, and empirical studies. Social psychological, sociological and socio-legal studies pinpoint the elements and function of apology, what makes apologies effective, and concerns about apology if it were implemented in the criminal justice system. Theoretical evidence is examined (including restorative justice, therapeutic jurisprudence, crime, shame, and reintegration) to explore the process of apology in the criminal justice context. Attribution theory and social conduct theory are used to explain the apology process specifically for victims and offenders. A brief examination of case law reveals that though apology has no formal place in criminal law, it has surfaced recently under the federal sentencing guidelines. Finally, empirical evidence in criminal justice settings reveals that offenders want to apologize and victims desire an apology. Moreover, by directly addressing the harmful act, apology may be the link to reduced recidivism for offenders, as well as empowerment for victims. This evidence combined suggests that apology is worthy of further study as a potentially valuable addition to the criminal justice process.