Search results

Prisoners with substance use disorder (SUD) are at risk of mental health problems. Given the common co-occurring of psychopathic traits with SUDs, probably because of underlying impulsive traits (Ellingson et al., 2018), this study aims to examine the relation between psychopathy (impulsive antisociality and fearless dominance) and the functioning of incarcerated individuals with SUD. The authors investigated whether impulsivity (motor, nonplanning and attentional) can account for the relationship between one psychopathy facet (impulsive antisociality) and craving and mental health problems.

The authors assessed self-reported impulsivity, psychopathy, craving and mental health problems in 121 male incarcerated individuals with SUD and calculated cross-sectional linear regression analyses and mediation models.

Impulsive antisociality was positively related to all impulsivity facets, craving and mental health problems. Attentional impulsivity mediated the relationship of impulsive antisociality with craving and mental health problems. Fearless dominance was related to lower attentional and nonplanning impulsivity, craving and mental health problems.

Future studies should investigate these relations in longitudinal studies and evaluate tailored approaches, for example, mindfulness interventions.

Interventions to reduce craving and improve mental health might be important for those who display self-centered, antisocial behavior but are less relevant for those with fearless, dominant interpersonal behavior. Addressing attentional impulsivity may be of special interest in this regard.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study was the first to investigate the mediating role of different impulsivity facets for the association of impulsive antisociality with craving and with mental health problems in incarcerated individuals with SUD.

This paper aims to use Q methodology to investigate Millennial perceptions toward private label or national brand apparel.

Q methodology was chosen to identify factors, which correspond to patterns of perceptions prevalent among Millennials. Participants were supplied with 14 statements that they sorted into two Q sorts – One representing perceptions of private label and the other representing perceptions of national brands. The Q sorts were completed through Qualtrics and participants answered open-ended questions on the placement of each statement within each Q sort.

Two factors emerged on private labels, highlighting patterns in price consciousness and uniqueness (acknowledged as patterns surrounding the desire for particular apparel characteristics). Three factors arose for national brand apparel, emphasizing the need for national brands to provide consumers with product security, quality and uniqueness (as identified through the unpreferred qualities national brands typically exhibit).

This study illustrates the various viewpoints retailers must consider when marketing apparel to a specific target demographic. In addition, a single perception (uniqueness) was found to connect motivations, which led to the development of a model for future inquiry.

Despite complete Q sorts and qualitative statements, participants' unfamiliarity with Q methodology and the sorting action of statements could be considered a limitation. The use of MTurk is also considered a limitation owing to the anonymity and possible deception of the workforce.

Private label brand personality growth has many retailers expanding their brand portfolios. Based on the findings of this study, specific opportunities are highlighted for the expansion and marketing of private labels and brand labels based on specific perceptions of a broad Millennial cohort.

In this chapter, we consider collaborative models of engaged research in comparison to models of team science that include persons with lived experience of the topic area as team members. ‘Co-led’, ‘co-design’ and ‘co-research’ are all terms used in the literature with distinct, but not precise, definitions and approaches. These collaborative models tend to describe methods that allow those with lived experience to be treated differently than other academic members of the research team. Power imbalances between those with lived experiences and researchers persist in such models, in spite of researcher efforts. For example, persons with lived experience are often described as being compensated with gift cards which may be welcomed but can be perceived as diminishing their role and contribution. In contrast, participatory team science involves persons with lived experience as full members of the research team. In the model that we propose, power is balanced through mutual planning and consensus-based decision-making. We contend that using participatory team science advances research through egalitarian consideration of team members' perspectives of the research problem and the designs necessary to knowledge development.