Search results

With a historic lack of attention to synthesis methods such as systematic review and meta-analysis and a lack of randomised controlled trials, the evidence base for behavioural interventions for children and adults who are autistic or are diagnosed with developmental disabilities is patchy. The Sharland Foundation Developmental Disabilities Applied Behavioural Research and Impact Network (SF-DDARIN), a network of like-minded researchers and practitioners across the UK, aims to address this. The purpose of this paper is to describe the network’s work and provide the context for the remaining articles in the special issue that exemplify network projects.

In this case study paper, the authors describe how the SF-DDARIN works and is resourced, detailing the process used to maximise research opportunities by facilitating network members working together. The authors outline the progressive research steps that the SF-DDARIN has identified are needed to develop and improve the evidence base for behavioural interventions systematically and, with examples, describe how the network delivers these steps.

Since its establishment in 2016, the SF-DDARIN network members have collectively worked on more than 53 projects involving over 50 researchers, had over 120 special schools contribute to projects and have recruited over 500 participants. This has been achieved through funding from the Sharland Foundation, primarily to cover the staffing costs of a small support team and internship partnerships with external organisations. Some projects have attracted external funding.

SF-DDARIN may provide an innovative, effective and resource-efficient model for other groups seeking to develop and extend their evidence base in developmental disability research.

The purpose of this study is to extend Bippus and Young’s (2005) study and examine the effectiveness of the “I-you,” “I,” “You,” “We,” “But” and Question-based “Why” statements from Winer’s (2021) verbal coding program of conflict management using Bandura’s (1977) social learning theory (SLT).

Mixed methods were used using 175 university students from Texas and New York. A cross-sectional convenience sampling approach was conducted. Survey data was collected using Qualtrics.

Descriptive results demonstrated that the “We” statement was the most passive, the “I-you” statement was the most assertive and the “But,” “I,” “You” and Question statements were perceived to be aggressive. In addition, assertive “I-You” statements were perceived to be more effective in resolving the conflict and maintaining a relationship, whereas aggressive statements were less likely to resolve the conflict and maintain the relationship. Qualitative themes also support the “I-You” statement as the most assertive, while the “But,” “You” and “I” statements were found to be the most aggressive statements.

Implications and applications are discussed to stimulate future research among researchers and practitioners when addressing conflict. Being aware of the verbal statements that de-escalate conflict may be helpful in solving conflict in interpersonal, family and professional relationships. Future trainings can adopt effective verbal statements to resolve conflict when experiencing anger issues. Future research can continue to investigate verbal communication statements using SLT to help practitioners and managers address conflict in interpersonal relationships.

This study examines verbal statements in relation to communication styles and conflict management.

To effectively combat the increasing rates of obesity, it is crucial to explore how environmental factors like sidewalk access impact weight-related outcomes. This study aimed to systematically examine the association between sidewalk accessibility and weight-related outcomes.

Databases were searched by keywords for relevant articles, which were published before March 3, 2024, to report the role of neighborhood sidewalk access on weight-related outcomes. The main findings of the selected articles were extracted from eligible studies by two independent reviewers.

A total of 20 out of 33 studies indicated a significant negative relationship between access to sidewalks and weight-related outcomes. Three studies demonstrated an indirect relationship between access to sidewalks and weight-related outcomes by greater access to physical environments. In addition, five studies reported no clear relationship, and three studies reported a significantly positive relationship between access to sidewalks and weight-related outcomes.

In general, people who live in urban areas with better sidewalk access benefit from better weight-related outcomes. Adults showed this correlation more prominently than adolescents and children. Therefore, sidewalks that have a positive effect on physical activity levels could be considered as a preventive measure against obesity.

One of the weight-related outcomes is obesity. Every community faces numerous challenges due to obesity, which adversely affects the quality of life and health. Environmental factors such as access to sidewalks could be associated with body weight due to lifestyle influences.