Search results

The disparities of COVID-19 vaccination rates between the rural and urban areas have become apparent during this pandemic. There is a need to understand the root causes of vaccine hesitancy demonstrated by the rural population to increase coverage and to contain the disease spread throughout the United States. This study aimed to explore other factors influencing vaccine hesitancy among rural dwellers besides the geography-related barriers such as poor health care access and individuals having no or suboptimal insurance coverage.

By reviewing existing data and literature about vaccination, health literacy, and behaviors, and prevailing ideologies, we discuss the potential causes of vaccine hesitancy in rural areas that could create barriers for successful public health efforts related to vaccine coverage and provide suggestions to ameliorate the situation.

Geography-related barriers, health literacy, and preconceived notions are key determinants of adopting healthy behaviors and complying with public health authorities' recommendations among rural individuals during a public-health crisis. We argue that ideology, which is much deeper than preconception or misconception on vaccination, should be incorporated as a key factor to redefine the term “vulnerable populations” in public health research.

The limitation of our study is that we have not found an effective way to encourage the populations who hold conservative religious and political ideologies to join the efforts for public health. Even though geography-related barriers may strongly impact the rural dwellers in achieving optimal health, the various forms of ideologies they have toward certain health behaviors cannot be discounted to understand and address vaccine-related disparities in rural areas. There is a need to redefine the term “vulnerable population” particularly as it relates to rural areas in the United States. During large-scale public health disasters, scholars and public health authorities should consider the ideologies of individuals, in addition to other factors such as race/ethnicity, area of residence (rural vs. urban), and socioeconomic factors influencing the existing vulnerabilities and health disparities.

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the response of the relevant authorities to evidence that female primary schoolteachers have an elevated suicide risk in the UK. The paper situates the recent tragic death of a primary school head teacher, following an Ofsted inspection at her school, within the wider context of teacher suicide deaths and asks what, if any, action the authorities have taken to prevent avoidable suicide deaths from occurring.

The paper examines a recent case of suicide by a primary head teacher within the wider context of statistical data on suicides by primary schoolteachers and in relation to previous cases of suicide linked to a school inspection.

The paper suggests that the relevant authorities have failed to act in relation to evidence of high suicide risk amongst female primary schoolteachers and to previous suicide deaths linked to the impact of a school inspection. Without learning from suicide deaths and acting on available evidence, there is a risk that preventable suicide deaths will continue to occur.

The paper draws together case study evidence and statistical data to make the case for regulatory reform to ensure that work-related suicides are investigated, monitored and prevented.

Governments in Southeast Asia have introduced and enforced harsh legal measures to stem the spread of COVID-19. These measures are disproportionate to the crisis and disregard fundamental human rights. Against this backdrop, public trust in government among Southeast Asians nevertheless remains relatively high – paradoxically, people living in authoritarian regimes tend to trust their governments more compared to people living in democratic regimes. The chapter examines the impacts that anti-COVID-19 legal measures have left on the protection of human rights and the seemingly paradoxical divorce between public trust and the diminished respect for fundamental human rights. Based on this examination, this chapter also proposes elements that any global treaty for future pandemic response must include in order to ensure the protection of human rights.

As a response to the COVID-19 pandemic, both educators and students adapted to course delivery modes no longer centered on in-person interactions. Resiliency and self-regulation are key to success in online contexts, but the rapid transition to remote learning left many students without the necessary support to develop these skills. Much of the existing literature on self-regulation and resiliency focuses on cognitive processes and strategies such as goal orientation, time management, and mindset. However, the added stress and trauma of learning in the context of a global pandemic highlighted the many other factors relevant to students’ development of these skills. Drawing from the literature, the authors explore evidence-informed teaching practices to foster self-regulation and resiliency, highlight the power and privilege of being able to be resilient, advocate for the development of pedagogies of kindness, and emphasize the “how” of implementing techniques to best support students. The authors provide evidence-informed suggestions with the goal of assisting instructors and students during times of high stress, while acknowledging their limitations in addressing structural inequalities highlighted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Nonetheless, the authors argue that evidence-informed techniques and compassionate pedagogies adopted during a period of upheaval remain applicable to future in-person and online pedagogies.

We use design thinking in the context of accounting pedagogy to exploit recent advances in cybernetics in the form of generative artificial intelligence technology. Relying on the intuition that supplementing or augmenting human argumentation (natural intelligence or NI) with parallel AI output can produce better student written assignments, we posit the “augmentation premise,” that is, ((NI + AI) > AI > NI). To test the augmentation premise, we compare student written submissions in an Accounting Information Systems (AIS) course with and without the benefit of parallel generative AI output. We then evaluate how the generative AI output enhances student-crafted revisions to their initial submissions. Using a summative quality improvement index (QII) consisting of quantitative and qualitative assessments, we present preliminary evidence supporting the augmentation premise. The augmentation premise likely extends to other accounting subdisciplines and merits generalization for enriching accounting pedagogy.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, huge numbers of employees shifted to remote working, with various consequences for their family and working lives. This study aims to focus on the factors that affect their creativity while working from home. As individual creativity is shaped by context, the authors investigate the moderating role of the domestic environment on employees’ creative contributions while working remotely.

The authors base the arguments on the complexity perspective on innovative work behaviour (IWB) and consider innovation a recursive process in which innovative behaviour can inform, and not simply follow, subsequent creative acts. The sudden spur of the pandemic interrupted the natural recursiveness of the creativity–innovation process and allowed them to empirically investigate the direct and indirect effects that levels of pre-pandemic IWB had on individuals’ creative behaviour. The authors hypothesise that this relationship is moderated by two resource-conserving contextual factors: work–home conflict and a feeling of social isolation. The participants were 803 employees from several Italian corporations. The data were collected during the first lockdown period (April–May 2020).

The findings support the existence of a three-way interaction, suggesting that IWB affects further creative behaviours when both work–home conflict and social isolation are low.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study that investigates what happened to employees’ creativity during the COVID-19 massive remote working situation. The results should be interpreted beyond the unique context because remote working will continue.