Examination of social capital and its relationship to disaster preparedness has grown in prominence partially due to world-wide need to effectively respond to terrorist attacks, viral epidemics, or natural disasters. Recent studies suggested that social capital may be related to a community’s ability to plan for and respond to such disasters. Few studies, however, have examined social capital constructs among low income populations living in disaster prone areas and accounted for the influence of social capital at the individual and community level. We examined social capital as measured by perceived fairness, perceived civic trust, perceived reciprocity and group membership. We undertook a multistage random cluster survey in three coastal counties in Texas (U.S.) noted for their high levels of poverty. Individuals from 3088 households provided data on social capital, socioeconomic and demographic characteristics, and self-reported level of preparedness for a hurricane. We used multivariable logistic regression to test potential associations between social capital measures and disaster preparedness. After adjusting for age, gender, marital status, ethnicity, education, employment, household income, acculturation, self-reported health, special needs persons in household, household size, and distance to the shore we found a higher prevalence of preparedness among individuals who reported the highest perception of fairness [AOR=3.12, 95% CI: (1.86, 5.21)] compared to those individuals who reported lowest perceptions of fairness. We also found a higher prevalence of preparedness [AOR= 2.06; 95% CI: (1.17, 3.62)] among individuals who reported highest perceptions of trust compared to individuals who reported lowest perceptions of trust. Perceived reciprocity and group membership were not associated with preparedness. These results extend previous findings on social capital and disaster preparedness and further characterize social capital’s presence among a low income population living in a hurricane prone area.

Worldwide, millions of children have missed out on early childhood education and care (ECEC) due to the closure of their settings during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, little is known about the socio-emotional impact of these closures on young children. This paper draws upon a study of 506 parents of children aged 1–10 years in Ireland who completed the online Play and Learning in the Early Years (PLEY) Survey during lockdown in May and June 2020. Parents responded to a series of questions about their child’s play, learning and development during lockdown, and described the impact of the restrictions on their children’s lives. The study was approved by the institutional ethics committee. Findings indicate that most children missed their friends, playing with other children, and the routine and structure of ECEC and school settings. Parents described the negative impact of the closure of these settings on their children’s social and emotional well-being, which they suggested, resulted in tantrums, anxiety, clinginess, boredom, and under-stimulation. However, some parents did report positive aspects of lockdown for their children and the family, including more time to play with siblings and a break from the usual routine. While the findings of the PLEY study indicate that children’s socio-emotional development was severely disrupted during lockdown, with a variety of negative impacts, this experience was not universal. Moreover, the findings suggest that families missed the nurturing environment provided by ECEC programs that supported their children's socio-emotional development, as well as the structure and routine afforded by their children's participation in early childhood programs.

This study evaluated two Internet-based versions of Parent Management Training (PMT) and the effects of greatly reducing the contact required of a mental health professional on treatment of children referred for conduct problems. We were interested whether reduced contact with a therapist influenced treatment outcome, therapeutic alliance, parent adherence to treatment prescriptions, and parent reactions to and evaluations of the treatment procedures. Sixty children and their caregivers were assigned to receive either Full Contact PMT (with the amount of weekly contact similar to traditional PMT; approximately 50 minutes of direct therapist contact each week) or Reduced Contact PMT (with most information provided through recordings; approximately 10 minutes of therapist contact each week). Children in both groups showed significant and similar reductions in antisocial behaviors specifically, internalizing and externalizing symptoms more generally, and improvements in overall adaptive functioning. Therapeutic alliance also was similar across the two treatment groups. However, parents rated Full Contact treatment as more acceptable than the reduced version. Both treatments were similar in outcomes to in-person treatment as evaluated by a nonrandomized matched sample used as a benchmark in supplementary analyses. Overall, the findings indicate that therapist contact can be reduced while positive treatment outcomes are maintained but that interventions that reduce direct time with a therapist may be viewed less positively by clients.

Background/Objective: The study evaluated two variations of Parent Management Training (PMT) for children referred to treatment for oppositional, aggressive, and antisocial behavior. The goal was to evaluate the impact of multiple enhancements to optimize common and placebo factors to augment therapeutic change. Method: The families of all children (N=138, 39 girls and 99 boys, ages 6-13) received PMT. One half of the families were assigned to receive an enhanced version with multiple additions designed to increase bonding of the parent to the therapist, professionalism of treatment and setting, credibility of the intervention, and expectancies for therapeutic change. Assessment included multiple treatment outcome measures of the child (problem behaviors, psychiatric symptoms, social competence, and adaptive functioning) and parents (depression, stress, and family relations) showed marked improvements over the course of treatment, and several process measures (therapeutic alliance, credibility of the procedures, expectancy for change). Results: The results indicated that children and parents made marked improvement in all the treatment outcome measures. The vast majority of children fell within the normative range at posttreatment on problem and prosocial behaviors. The two treatment conditions were no different in outcomes for children or parents. Conclusion: PMT led to marked changes in treatment outcome.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.Where to now for early childhood care and education (ECCE) graduates? A study of the experiences of Irish BA ECCE degree graduates