The punitive turn in criminal justice policy, epitomized by policies like three‐strikes, truth in sentencing, and mandatory minimums, is often attributed in part to demand for harsher criminal justice responses from an increasingly punitive public. It has been argued that public opinion, known to be both largely uninformed and often misunderstood, might both indirectly and directly affect policy. This survey article on punitiveness in public opinion opens with a discussion of competing depictions of the nature of the relationship between a punitive public and increasingly punitive criminal justice policies. The article then focuses on some of the most influential explanations for variations in punitiveness within individuals and across groups. A review of what we know about public attitudes toward punishment and a brief explanation of how we know what we know (e.g. the methodologies by which we gauge public opinion) follow. The article concludes with the observation that as methodologies continue to improve and the literature in this area continues to grow, so too does our understanding of punitive public opinion in all of its complexity.

In the period 1991-96, 156 undergraduates from 14 health disciplines at the University of Sydney completed rural attachments in rural and remote areas of Australia as part of the Rural Careers Project. On return from their attachment, students were encouraged to write a brief report of their experiences. Ninety-two available reports were analysed as one means of assessing the success of the attachments with respect to informing students about rural health issues and stimulating their interest in rural careers after graduation. A content analysis of the students' written comments about their perceptions and experiences was completed. Students were extremely positive about the value of the attachments and expressed more positive than negative comments regarding their perceptions of rural life and work. The results show that rural attachments are indeed worthwhile learning opportunities.

Approximately 15 million children under age 6 are in childcare settings, offering childcare providers an opportunity to influence children’s dietary intake. Childcare settings vary in organizational structure – childcare centers (CCCs) vs. family childcare homes (FCCHs) – and in geographical location – urban vs. rural. Research on the nutrition-related best practices across these childcare settings is scarce. The objective of this study is to compare nutrition-related best practices of CCCs and FCCHs that participate in the Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP) in rural and urban Nebraska. Nebraska providers (urban n = 591; rural n = 579) reported implementation level, implementation difficulty and barriers to implementing evidence-informed food served and mealtime practices. Chi-square tests comparing CCCs and FCCHs in urban Nebraska and CCCs and FCCHs in rural Nebraska showed sub-optimal implementation for some practices across all groups, including limiting fried meats and high sugar/ high fat foods, using healthier foods or non-food treats for celebrations and serving meals family style. Significant differences (p < .05) between CCCs and FCCHs also emerged, especially with regard to perceived barriers to implementing best practices. For example, CCCs reported not having enough money to cover the cost of meals for providers, lack of control over foods served and storage problems, whereas FCCHs reported lack of time to prepare healthier foods and sit with children during mealtimes. Findings suggest that policy and public health interventions may need to be targeted to address the unique challenges of implementing evidence-informed practices within different organizational structures and geographic locations.

Background Long-term evaluation studies reveal that high-quality early care and education (ECE) programs that include a lifestyle component predict later adult health outcomes. The purpose of this article is to characterize the nutrition and physical activity (PA) practices, including implementation difficulty and barriers, of licensed center- and family home-based ECE programs serving 2- to 5-year-old children in Minnesota (MN) and Wisconsin (WI). Method A stratified random sampling procedure was used to select representative cross sections of licensed ECE providers in MN and WI. A total of 2,000 providers (1,000 center-based, 1,000 family home-based) were randomly selected and invited to respond to a 97-item survey with questions representing (1) nutrition and PA practices, (2) barriers to meeting nutrition and PA best practices, and (3) written and implemented nutrition and PA policies. Summated scales were constructed for nutrition-related (range 0–15; Cronbach’s α = .86) and for PA-related best practices (range 0–10; Cronbach’s α = .82). Results A total of 823 providers returned surveys between August 2010 and March 2011, resulting in a 44% bistate participation rate. Across all programs an average (SD) of 7.0 (4.1) nutrition best practices were already implemented. Center-based providers reported on average 0.8 additional nutrition best practice (7.4 vs. 6.6, p = .01). Across all programs an average (SD) of 5.2 (3.1) PA best practices were already implemented. Center-based providers reported on average one more PA best practice (5.3 vs. 4.3, p < .01). The cost of healthy food and the weather were identified as barriers by 80% of providers, regardless of program type.

Food policy councils (FPCs) are collaboratives that work to strengthen food systems. Over 300 FPCs exist in the United States, Canada, and Tribal Nations. In 2015, we surveyed the types of initiatives FPCs undertook and identified food sector targets and domains of potential impact in an effort to inform comprehensive FPC impact assessments. FPCs (N=66) reported 317 policy, systems, and environmental initiatives. At least half