This cross-sectional study examines the association between heavy alcohol use among active duty military personnel and five work productivity loss events that may have an adverse effect on military performance and readiness. Data for light (N = 3,147) and heavy (N = 2,242) drinkers, categorized by gender and pay grade, were obtained from the 1995 Department of Defense Worldwide Survey. Drinking classification was predefined using a standard algorithm that factored quantity and frequency of wine, beer, and liquor consumed. The relative risks of experiencing a productivity loss event at a particular level and 95% confidence intervals were calculated by applying the Mantel-Haenszel method after adjusting for age. The relative risks for increased self-reported lateness, leaving early, low performance, and on-the-job injury were all higher for heavy drinkers than for light drinkers. This association between the heavy-drinking population and four of five work productivity loss events indicates that prevention programs should target all personnel.

State settlements with the tobacco industry increased the availability of funds that might be used for improving health outcomes and increased scrutiny of tobacco control funding overall. This research identified potential explanatory factors for state tobacco control funding and developed a conceptual framework to guide further exploration. Key informant interviews with 14 tobacco policy professionals were conducted to augment the information available in the scientific literature on funding influences. Interviews yielded a comprehensive list of 26 factors that were returned to key informants for ratings of importance using a modified Delphi process. Results indicate that the top funding influences are budgetary constraints, lobbying, advocacy, tobacco economy, legislative priorities, public opinion, and leadership by the governor or state legislators. A conceptual diagram is presented of all factors clustered into three categories. Further research is planned to quantify these factors and assess their explanatory value

No abstract

Four groups of student hallmates provided similarity ratings of each other, and they rated each other on various characteristics. Group-level multidimensional scaling analyses suggested that there was no consensual social structure in any of the four groups. In contrast, individual-level analyses found that individuals had coherent perceptions of the social structures of their groups, although no 2 members of any group perceived the social structure of their group similarly. Nevertheless, there was considerable similarity among people in the dimensions underlying their perceived structures. Conventionality, friendliness, influence, and interpersonal openness served as organizing dimensions for the majority of participants, and sense of humor, how hard it was to get along with people, introversion, interesting, and academic orientation were important bases for about a third of the participants.The present study examined group members' perceptions of the structures of their informal groups. Data were collected that provided both nomothetic descriptions of group structure (Is there a consensually agreed-on structure to a group?) and idiographic descriptions (What structures do individual members perceive?).The assumption underlying the present study was that informal structures are emergent phenomena that do not correspond to or reflect written or objective criteria; rather, informal structures consist of people's cognitive organization of a set of stimuli (i.e., group members).Determining the nature of the structure of informal groups could have important theoretical and practical implications. Theoretically speaking, the existence of consensually recognized structures is consistent with the existence