The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted the timing and substance of conservation research, management, and public engagement in protected areas around the world. This disruption is evident in US national parks, which play a key role in protecting natural and cultural resources and providing outdoor experiences for the public. Collectively, US national parks protect 34 million ha, host more than 300 million visits annually, and serve as one of the world's largest informal education organizations. The pandemic has altered park conditions and operations in a variety of ways. Shifts in operational conditions related to safety issues, reduced staffing, and decreased park revenues have forced managers to make difficult trade-offs among competing priorities. Long-term research and monitoring of the health of ecosystems and wildlife populations have been interrupted. Time-sensitive management practices, such as control of invasive plants and restoration of degraded habitat, have been delayed. And public engagement has largely shifted from in-person experiences to virtual engagement through social media and other online interactions. These changes pose challenges for accomplishing important science, management, and public engagement goals, but they also create opportunities for developing more flexible monitoring programs and inclusive methods of public engagement. The COVID-19 pandemic reinforces the need for strategic science, management planning, flexible operations, and online public engagement to help managers address rapid and unpredictable challenges.

Noise, or unwanted sound, exposure has been shown to have a wide range of negative physical and psychological effects. Although situational context, sound characteristics, and individual expectation affect the experience of noise and its related outcomes, the personality trait of noise sensitivity also plays a critical role in assessing noise impacts. As the most widely used 21item Noise Sensitivity Scale measure of sensitivity is often too long to administer in time-sensitive field settings, the authors conducted five studies to create and validate a shortened, field friendly version of the original, longer measure of noise sensitivity. The resulting five-item measure of noise sensitivity was shown to be internally consistent, temporally stable, highly correlated with the original measure, and predictive of noise-related outcomes such as attitudes toward specific noise, acceptability ratings of noise events, and motivations for visiting quiet locations. The applied value of the scale and implications for facilitating future research are discussed.

No abstract

No abstract

Mental health and general health care research has shown that practitioners can facilitate patient involvement in shared decision making (SDM) and that the approach can benefit patients who wish to take part in decisions around their care. Yet patient experiences of SDM within a psychotherapy context have been little researched. This study examined how clients experienced SDM in a collaborative‐integrative psychotherapy. A grounded theory approach used interpersonal process recall interviewing and supplementary semi‐structured interviews to investigate 14 clients' experiences of SDM in pluralistic psychotherapy for depression. Verbatim transcripts were coded into 819 meaning units across six categories containing 13 subcomponents that comprised a single, core category. The six categories were (a) experiencing decisions as shared, (b) psychotherapists supporting clients to become more active in the decision‐making process, (c) both parties presenting and recognizing expert knowledge, (d) clients felt recognized as an individual and accommodated for by their psychotherapist, (e) clients felt comfortable engaging with the decision‐making process, and (f) daunting for clients to be asked to take part in decision discussions. A core category emerged of “Psychotherapists encourage client participation and progressively support clients to provide information and contributions towards shared treatment decisions that could be led equally, or marginally more by one party.” Such support was particularly useful when clients had difficulty contributing as part of decision discussions. Client preferences for SDM change across clients and across decisions, highlighting the importance of practitioners remaining flexible to individual clients when using the approach.