Search

Introduction: the normal process of blood coagulation takes place under the control of protein coagulation molecules or coagulation factors, which are encoded by the corresponding protein-coding genes. The abnormal coagulation course, often cause of thromboembolic pathological conditions. Detection of pathological mutations of these genes has high importance in clinical medicine. Aim: The prevalence determination of specific coagulation gene mutations, important for timely anticoagulation therapy in personalized clinical medicine. Materials and methods: specimens of peripheral blood, taken from clinically selected patients, were analyzed to presence of specific gene mutations, by PCR and DNA sequencing methods. Results: after analysis of a total 121 specimens, determined total percentage mutation values were: 71%PAI-1(4G/5G); 23,6% MTHFR (C677T); 19% MTHFR (A1298C); 12,7% F13(G100T); 9,9% F5(G1691A); 1,6% F2(G20210A). Conclusion: the determination of these mutations is very important predictive molecular anticoagulant biomarkers for pregnant women and patients with autoimmune disorders. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While considering the role of group-level factors as predictors of collective action, research has overlooked the role of group prototypes in determining willingness to engage in collective action. To begin to investigate this area, we conducted two correlational studies (N s = 141 and 98) in high schools examining the association between prototypical ingroup members' desire to engage in collective action and participants' collective action on behalf of a disadvantaged group (immigrants). Results showed a positive association between these two variables. We also investigated boundaries of this effect, finding that the association emerged when participants lacked personal experiences with the disadvantaged group (cross-group friendships; Study 1) or identified more with their ingroup, an effect also found when including a behavioral measure of collective action (Study 2). Intentions to follow the prototypical ingroup member emerged as the mediator (Study 2). It is worth noting that our methodology allowed us to assess prototypicality in a naturalistic context by calculating a metacontrast ratio for each group member, in line with self-categorization theory's conceptualization of prototypicality. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications, with reference to the role of prototypicality as a means of social influence and to developing social norms in the context of collective action. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The responsibility for addressing gender inequality typically falls on women. More recently, evidence has shown that solidarity-based framing is a starting point for increasing men's support of gender equality efforts. This paper moves beyond these women's issue and solidarity approaches to examine whether positioning men as being either responsible for addressing inequality (Experiment 1; N = 258) or being directly affected by inequality themselves (Experiment 2; N = 543), shapes men's (and women's) attitudes toward male and female leaders promoting gender equality and their mobilization toward this cause. In Experiment 1, men evaluated male and female leaders as more prototypical and higher in leadership identification under common cause compared to women's issue frames (and also compared to men's responsibility frames for leadership identification). In Experiment 2 all participants evaluated (male) leaders more positively under common cause and covictimization framing compared to men's victimization framing. Contrary to predictions, men's (Experiments 1-2) and women's (Experiment 2) collective action intent remained stable across message frames. Yet when it comes to mobilization, in Experiment 2 women showed solidarity more readily (i.e., were committed to gender equality across frames) while men's mobilization was dependent on men being directly victimized. We discuss practical and theoretical implications of mobilizing support for gender equality, and important caveats of increasing male allies' involvement in the movement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Common experience of injustice can be a potent motivator of collective action and efforts to achieve social change - and of such efforts becoming more widespread. In this research, we propose that the effects of co-victimization on collective action are a function of inclusive social identity. Experiment 1 (N= 61) demonstrated that while presence (compared to absence) of co-victimization positively predicted consumer (i.e., participants) willingness to act collectively in solidarity with sweatshop workers, this effect was mediated by inclusive social identity. In Experiment 2 (N= 120), the salience of inclusive social identity was experimentally manipulated and interacted with co-victimization to predict collective action. When inclusive social identity was salient, co-victimization enhanced collective action, including willingness to pay extra for products made ethically and in support of fair wages for workers. In contrast, collective action was attenuated when co-victimization took place in the absence of inclusive social identity. Implications for understanding when co-victimization is transformed into common fate and political solidarity with the disadvantaged are discussed., (©2011 The British Psychological Society.)