Search

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic led to significant, unforeseen changes in classroom instructions, including the evaluation of students. Objective: The purpose of this study was to investigate college students' cheating both before and during the COVID-19 pandemic in terms of (a) preponderance of cheating, (b) the factors that may have led to an increase in the amount of cheating, and (c) the underlying reasons for and affective response to cheating. Method: A sample of primarily Psychology majors (N = 214) attending a public land-grant university in the southeastern U.S. voluntarily completed a survey at the end of the Fall 2020 semester. Results: The results showed that the COVID-19 pandemic increased first time cheating, cheating in online classes was higher than that of in-person classes for most types of graded materials, and students are adept and adaptive at dealing with faculty attempts to combat cheating. Students' primary reasons for cheating were "feeling pressure," and "pandemic," and students who had cheated reported feeling "relieved" most often. Conclusion: With the onset of the pandemic and subsequent increase in online instruction, cheating behavior has also increased. Teaching Implications: As online enrollment continues to grow, understanding students' cheating behavior.

Background: Previous non-fatal overdose may increase risk of overdose fatality for women reentering the community following incarceration, but pre-incarceration overdose experiences are understudied. This study describes the prevalence and correlates of non-fatal overdose prior to jail among women with opioid use disorder (OUD). Methods: Women (N = 700) were randomly selected from eight Kentucky jails, screened for OUD, and interviewed as part of the NIDA-funded Kentucky Justice Community Opioid Innovation Network (JCOIN) trial. Descriptive statistics were used to examine women's prior overdose experiences, while bivariate analyses and logistic regression were used to identify correlates of overdose in the 90 days prior to jail. Results: Analyses found that 55.4% of women had overdosed in their lifetime, and 21.4% overdosed in the 90 days prior to jail. Of those who overdosed in the 90 days prior to jail, heroin (80.7%) was the most-commonly used drug prior to overdose, 35.2% received emergency, medically-attended services post-overdose, and 92.4% were administered naloxone – primarily by acquaintances. Overdosing in the 90 days prior to jail was positively correlated with identifying as a sexual minority, being from an urban community, childhood victimization, as well as recent heroin, fentanyl, and injection drug use. Conclusions: Findings indicate that prior overdose is common among jailed women with OUD, and although naloxone was often administered, few women received medically-attended services post-overdose. Results highlight the importance of distributing naloxone to community members and women reentering the community from jail, and suggest additional research is needed to understand factors inhibiting medical care following an overdose. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper overviews the importance of justice and health-care partnerships in a MOUD feasibility trial in a rural Appalachian community. Research partners included a local jail, a local community supervision office, and a local community federally qualified health center. This paper describes the pilot feasibility study participants and methodology, as well as lessons learned including the challenges encountered and needed changes to address feasibility as the environment changes over time. Implications for social work research, practice, and policy advocacy focused on delivery of extended-release naltrexone and other MOUDs are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Justice‐involved women frequently report maltreatment and intimate relationships characterized by violence and abuse throughout adulthood. The present study aimed to (a) investigate the association between victimization and sexual relationship power (SRP) among justice‐involved women with opioid use disorder (OUD) and (b) explore resilience as a potential moderating factor of the association between victimization and SRP. Under the ongoing Kentucky Justice Community Opioid Innovation Network (JCOIN) cooperative, justice‐involved women (N = 700) were randomly selected from eight jails in Kentucky, screened for OUD, consented to participate, and interviewed by research staff. SRP was examined using the Sexual Relationship Power Scale, a validated instrument with two distinct subscales measuring decision‐making dominance (DMD) and relationship control (RC); prior maltreatment was measured using the Global Appraisal of Individual Needs General Victimization Scale, and resilience was assessed using the Brief Resilience Scale. Linear regression was used to examine the association between maltreatment and SRP, with three models constructed to account for SRP, DMD, and RC, controlled for demographic characteristics. Finally, we examined whether the association between victimization and SRP varied as a function of resilience. Significant negative associations between maltreatment and the SRP were observed, ps <.001. Resilience moderated the association between maltreatment and DMD, p =.005; however, resilience did not moderate the associations between maltreatment and SRP, p =.141, or RC, p =.735. These findings highlight the importance of increasing resilience in justice‐involved women with OUD to reduce the impact of maltreatment on SRP. Prioritizing resilience may offer significant benefits for preventing and addressing maltreatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study investigated the impact of victim crying and gender on perceptions of rape cases. Participants (N = 240, 51.5% male, 48.1% female) completed a 2 (victim crying) × 2 (victim gender) × 2 (participant gender) between-participants design with case judgments (e.g., verdict) as the DVs. Results found that a rape victim crying during testimony increased pro-victim judgments compared to when the victim did not cry, that female mock jurors were more pro-victim than males, but that victim gender was insignificant. Finally, the mediation model found that victim crying increased their credibility, increasing the likelihood of a guilty verdict. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study utilized a 4 (testimony condition) × 2 (participant gender) between-participants design to investigate how mock jurors react to hearsay testimony in an adult sexual assault case. Participants included 211 community members (106 female, 105 male). Mock jurors read a trial summary involving an adult sexual assault case that varied only in the Prosecution's primary witness featuring either victim testimony, brief-hearsay testimony (simply reporting that the crime occurred), elaborate-hearsay testimony (describing the crime at a similar length as the victim), or a control condition. Consistent with expectations, hearsay and victim testimony yielded guilty verdict rates comparable to each other and higher than that of the control condition. Additionally, victim credibility mediated the relationship, such that participants were more likely to render a guilty verdict if they perceived the victim as more credible. The results of this experiment will be discussed in terms of how rape cases are prosecuted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We examined the impact of attorney gender on perceptions of a criminal rape trial. Community members (N = 208) read a trial summary describing a rape scenario in which the gender of the prosecuting and defense attorney were manipulated. The results revealed indirect effects of prosecuting and defense attorney gender on verdict through perceptions of characteristics related to attorney competency. Qualitative analyses further showed that the terms "strength" and "powerful" were central to juror perceptions of male attorneys, whereas the terms "sensitive" and "sympathy" were central when the attorneys were female. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]