Laurie M. Joyner

Bio: Laurie M. Joyner is an academic researcher from Loyola University New Orleans. The author has contributed to research in topics: Sociological imagination & Public policy. The author has an hindex of 3, co-authored 4 publications receiving 60 citations. Previous affiliations of Laurie M. Joyner include Tulane University.

Reliability and Validity of the Addiction Severity Index among Homeless Substance Misusers

Abstract: Retrospective self-reports of behavior are widely used in alcohol and drug research. However, assessments of the reliability and validity of such data among certain populations are nonexistent. This study examines the ability of the Addiction Severity Index (ASI), a widely used clinical and research instrument, to provide valid and reliable data within a homeless population of drug misusers. The results support the usefulness of the ASI in producing quality data among homeless substance misusers seeking treatment. Qualitative data gathered from field interviewers are used to highlight strategies for enhancing the quality of ASI data in the future.

Issues in implementing a randomized experiment in a field setting

Abstract: Because of the differential perspectives, needs, and interests that undergird clinical and research objectives, program staff may wittingly or unwittingly sabotage randomization. A case study of the New Orleans Homeless Substance Abusers Program amply documents this process.

Applied Research in the Pursuit of Justice: Creating Change in the Community and the Academy

Abstract: THIS ARTICLE DELINEATES THE BOUNDARIES BETWEEN BASIC, APPLIED, AND CLINICAL sociological work and the role of applied research in the development of the discipline. (1) I argue that the call for social science research to be "value-free" is untenable and that a legitimate role for the sociologist involves using one's disciplinary perspective and research to inform program and policy development in an attempt to improve the quality of life for marginalized groups. Drawing from my own research experiences, I make the case that the distinction between basic and applied research is frequently overdrawn and that attempts to support an objective and detached research identity within the context of community-based projects may undermine the success of interventions and weaken understanding of social life and processes. The challenges of integrating applied work into an academic career are acknowledged, given prevailing academic norms related to faculty responsibilities. The promising role of service learning and applied sociological research in developing socially conscious students, engaging faculty in the community, and contributing to incremental change geared toward social justice are discussed. Last, strategies for altering the faculty recognition and reward structures to support and encourage applied work directed toward social change are highlighted. What Distinguishes Basic, Applied, and Clinical Sociology? DeMartini (1989) argues that basic sociological research is discipline oriented, focused on knowledge production, and geared toward fellow sociologists. In contrast, applied sociological research is client oriented, focused on problem solving, and dedicated to the persuasive use of data to respond to diverse stakeholders (DeMartini, 1989: 137). He further emphasizes the distinction between basic or "sociology as social science" and applied or "sociology as problem solving" and points out that the two types of work are often difficult to merge. This perspective is not shared by Alexander Boros, the founder of the Society for Applied Sociology (SAS), who argues that for sociology to be "workable" and prosper, it must validate its knowledge and theories through practice in the real world (1997: 41). In other words, Boros envisions basic and applied research as complementary and mutually beneficial in refining our understanding of social life. Straus (2002) conceptualizes applied and clinical sociology as two elements or components of sociological practice. Under this model, he and others (e.g., Fritz and Clark, 1989) define applied sociology as problem-solving research that utilizes sociological concepts and methods, whereas clinical sociology is distinguished by the "application of sociological concepts, perspectives, and methods to interventions for individual and social change" (Straus, 2002: 17). In my experience, the distinctions between applied and clinical sociology are frequently not transparent given that applied research often results in recommendations that the sociologist/ practitioner may be invited to help initiate or implement. In short, we can think of basic, applied, and clinical work as existing along a continuum without clear lines of demarcation in either their conceptualization by sociologists or in the way they are actually practiced, Iutcovich (1997: 15) points out that these divergent definitions result from "the process of identity formation and legitimation." The nature of this "contested terrain" has led to my own preference for a rather broad conception of applied work, such as that offered by Steele (1997: 87): "Any use (often client-centered) of the sociological perspective and/or its tools in the understanding of, intervention in, and/or enhancement of human social life." History of Applied Work in Sociology It is interesting that early sociologists at influential institutions such as the University of Chicago would have viewed the distinction between basic and applied sociology as "redundant" given their concern with social progress and reform (Du Bois, 2001; Iutcovich, 1997). …

Health Behavior among the Homeless and the Poor

Abstract: The growing emphasis on health behavior among health researchers and the parallel emphasis on prevention among health practitioners should not be allowed to obscure critically important relationships between health behavior and larger social, cultural, and economic forces. In the language of research methods, behavior is an intervening variable, not an independent one. The complex relationships among behavior, culture, and social structure are all too easily ignored in the rhetoric of public policy debates and in simple-minded thinking about issues that arise in these debates.

Moral leniency towards belief-consistent disinformation may help explain its spread on social media

Abstract: The spread of false and misleading information on social media is largely dependent on human action. Understanding the factors that lead social media users to amplify (or indeed intervene in) the spread of this content is an ongoing challenge. Prior research suggests that users are not only more likely to interact with misinformation that supports their ideology or their political beliefs, they may also feel it is more acceptable to spread. However, less is known about the influence of newer, issue-specific beliefs. Two online studies explored the relationship between the degree of belief-consistency of disinformation on users’ moral judgements and intentions to spread disinformation further. Four disinformation narratives were presented: disinformation that supported or undermined the UK Government’s handling of COVID-19, and disinformation that minimised or maximised the perceived risk of COVID-19. A novel scale for measuring intentions to contribute to the spread of social media content was also used in study 2. Participants reported greater likelihood of spreading false material that was consistent with their beliefs. More lenient moral judgements related to the degree of belief-consistency with disinformation, even when participants were aware the material was false or misleading. These moral judgements partially mediated the relationship between belief-consistency of content and intentions to spread it further on social media. While people are concerned about the spread of disinformation generally, they may evaluate belief-consistent disinformation differently from others in a way that permits them to spread it further. As social media platforms prioritise the ordering of feeds based on personal relevance, there is a risk that users could be being presented with disinformation that they are more tolerant of.

Trauma and Substance Abuse: Causes, Consequences, and Treatment of Comorbid Disorders

Abstract: Over the past decade, research on the epidemiology, nature, and meaning of the comorbidity between trauma, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and substance abuse has burgeoned. Changes in the political and social climate of the United States during this time have brought with them new challenges. Changes in the definitions of both PTSD and substance abuse have been proposed by those involved with diagnosing and treating people with these issues; some of these changes are expected to be reflected in future diagnostic systems. Trauma and Substance Abuse: Causes, Consequences, and Treatment of Comorbid Disorders, Second Edition offers a broad overview of current trends in the field of co-occurring substance abuse and PTSD from both clinical and research perspectives. The goal of this volume, newly revised to include special settings, such as court systems and disasters, and special populations, such as veterans, is to clarify issues specific to trauma, PTSD, and substance abuse and to translate both quantitative and qualitative data into specific recommendations for clinicians, researchers, and administrators.

Studies of the reliability and validity of the Addiction Severity Index.

Abstract: Aims To examine the reliability and validity of the widely used Addiction Severity Index (ASI) Material Thirty-seven studies of the psychometric performance of the ASI Findings The inter-rater and test–retest reliabilities of the severity ratings and composites scores vary from excellent to unsatisfactory High internal consistencies have been reported regularly for only three of the seven composite scores (medical status, alcohol use, psychiatric status) The remaining four composite scores (employment status, drug use, legal status, family/social relations) have low consistencies in at least four different studies Coefficients of criterion validity are often low Conclusions There is a discrepancy between the psychometric performance of the ASI and its purported clinical, administrative and research uses

Evaluation of a Mental Health Treatment Court with Assertive Community Treatment.

Abstract: Without active engagement, many adults with serious mental illnesses remain untreated in the community and commit criminal offenses, resulting in their placement in the jails rather than mental health facilities. A mental health treatment court (MHTC) with an assertive community treatment (ACT) model of case management was developed through the cooperative efforts of the criminal justice and mental health systems. Participants were 235 adults with a serious mental illness who were booked into the county jail, and who volunteered for the study. An experimental design was used, with participants randomly assigned to MHTC or treatment as usual (TAU), consisting of adversarial criminal processing and less intensive mental health treatment. Results were reported for 6 and 12 month follow-up periods. Clients in both conditions improved in life satisfaction, distress, and independent living, while participants in the MHTC also showed reductions in substance abuse and new criminal activity. Outcomes are interpreted within the context of changes brought about in the community subsequent to implementation of the MHTC.

Community-engaged scholarship: is faculty work in communities a true academic enterprise?

Abstract: Since Ernest Boyer's landmark 1990 report, Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate, leaders in higher education, including academic medicine, have advocated that faculty members apply their expertise in new and creative ways in partnership with communities. Such community engagement can take many forms, including community-based teaching, research, clinical care, and service. There continues to be a gap, however, between the rhetoric of this idea and the reality of how promotion and tenure actually work in health professions schools. The Commission on Community-Engaged Scholarship in the Health Professions was established in October 2003 with funding from the W.K. Kellogg Foundation to take a leadership role in creating a more supportive culture and reward system for community-engaged faculty in the nation's health professions schools. The authors prepared this article to inform the commission's deliberations and to stimulate discussion among educators in the health professions. The authors define the work that faculty engage in with communities, consider whether all work by faculty in community-based settings is actually scholarship, and propose a framework for documenting and assessing community-engaged scholarship for promotion and tenure decisions. They conclude with recommendations for change in academic health centers and health professions schools.

The effect of traumatic brain injury on the health of homeless people

Abstract: Background: We sought to determine the lifetime prevalence of traumatic brain injury and its association with current health conditions in a representative sample of homeless people in Toronto, Ontario. Methods: We surveyed 601 men and 303 women at homeless shelters and meal programs in 2004–2005 (response rate 76%). We defined traumatic brain injury as any self-reported head injury that left the person dazed, confused, disoriented or unconscious. Injuries resulting in unconsciousness lasting 30 minutes or longer were defined as moderate or severe. We assessed mental health, alcohol and drug problems in the past 30 days using the Addiction Severity Index. Physical and mental health status was assessed using the SF-12 health survey. We examined associations between traumatic brain injury and health conditions. Results: The lifetime prevalence among homeless participants was 53% for any traumatic brain injury and 12% for moderate or severe traumatic brain injury. For 70% of respondents, their first traumatic brain injury occurred before the onset of homelessness. After adjustment for demographic characteristics and lifetime duration of homelessness, a history of moderate or severe traumatic brain injury was associated with significantly increased likelihood of seizures (odds ratio [OR] 3.2, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.8 to 5.6), mental health problems (OR 2.5, 95% CI 1.5 to 4.1), drug problems (OR 1.6, 95% CI 1.1 to 2.5), poorer physical health status (–8.3 points, 95% CI –11.1 to –5.5) and poorer mental health status (–6.0 points, 95% CI –8.3 to –3.7). Interpretation: Prior traumatic brain injury is very common among homeless people and is associated with poorer health.