Georgia State University

About: Georgia State University is a education organization based out in Atlanta, Georgia, United States. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Poison control. The organization has 13988 authors who have published 35895 publications receiving 1164332 citations. The organization is also known as: GSU & Georgia State.

Received and perceived social support in times of stress: a test of the social support deterioration deterrence model.

Abstract: The authors evaluated the impact of receiving social support on subsequent levels of perceived social support and psychological distress in 2 independent samples of victims of severe natural disasters: Hurricane Hugo (n = 498) and Hurricane Andrew (n = 404). A social support deterioration deterrence model was proposed that stipulated that postdisaster mobilization of received support counteracts the deterioration in expectations of support often experienced by victims of major life events. LISREL analyses of data collected 12 and 24 months after Hugo and 6 and 28 months after Andrew provided strong evidence for the hypothesized model: Perceived support mediated the long-term effects on distress of both scope of disaster exposure and postdisaster received support. Theoretical and application issues of social support are discussed.

The Effect of Investment Banking Relationships on Financial Analysts' Earnings Forecasts and Investment Recommendations*

Abstract: . This study shows that financial analysts of brokerage firms that provide investment banking services to a company (investment banker analysts) are optimistic, relative to other (noninvestment banker) analysts, in their earnings forecasts and investment recommendations. Returns earned by following the investment recommendations of investment banker analysts, however, are not significantly different from those of non-investment banker analysts. Given that information regarding the investment banking relationships of brokerage firms is publicly available, we find evidence that capital market participants rely relatively less on the investment banker analysts in forming their earnings expectations. Although we find a significant capital market reaction around the noninvestment banker analysts' research report dates and not around the investment banker analysts' research report dates, the difference between the two market reactions is not statistically significant. Finally, we find that investment banker analysts' earnings forecasts are, on average, as accurate as those of noninvestment banker analysts. Resume. Les auteurs mettent en evidence le fait que les analystes financiers des maisons de courtage qui offrent des services de prise ferme aux entreprises (les analystes de courtiers preneurs ferme) sont optimistes dans leurs previsions de benefices et leurs recommandations de placements, par comparaison aux autres analystes (c'est-a-dire aux analystes de courtiers qui ne sont pas preneurs ferme). Les rendements obtenus par les investisseurs qui observent les recommandations de placements des analystes de courtiers preneurs ferme ne sont cependant pas sensiblement differents de ceux qu'obtiennent les investisseurs qui se fient aux analystes des courtiers qui ne sont pas preneurs ferme. Compte tenu du fait que l'information relative aux relations qu'entretiennent les maisons de courtage en matiere de prise ferme est du domaine public, les constatations des auteurs confirment que les participants au marche financier s'appuient relativement moins sur le verdict des analystes des courtiers preneurs ferme dans le calcul de leur esperance de gains. Bien que les auteurs observent une reaction marquee du marche financier a proximite des dates de publication des rapports de recherche des analystes des courtiers qui ne sont pas preneurs ferme, ce qui n'est pas le cas a proximite des dates de publication des rapports de recherche des analystes des courtiers preneurs ferme, la difference entre ces deux reactions n'est pas statistiquement significative. Enfin, les auteurs constatent que les previsions de benefices des analystes des courtiers preneurs ferme sont, en moyenne, aussi exactes que celles des analystes des courtiers qui ne sont pas preneurs ferme.

Diversity in information systems action research methods

Abstract: Discussions of action research in information systems (IS) often proceed as if there were one definitive action research method. This paper describes and analyses the different frameworks, assumptions and goals that characterise the diverse forms of action research. A more inclusive action research paradigm is delineated that offers a basis for validating a wider range of IS research. Acceptance of the full range of the diverse forms of action research may enable the IS field to be more explicit about its research methodology, thereby enabling criteria to be improved and applied to a broader range of IS research.

Bacteria penetrate the normally impenetrable inner colon mucus layer in both murine colitis models and patients with ulcerative colitis

Abstract: Objective The inner mucus layer in mouse colon normally separates bacteria from the epithelium. Do humans have a similar inner mucus layer and are defects in this mucus layer a common denominator for spontaneous colitis in mice models and ulcerative colitis (UC)? Methods and results The colon mucus layer from mice deficient in Muc2 mucin, Core 1 O -glycans, Tlr5, interleukin 10 (IL-10) and Slc9a3 (Nhe3) together with that from dextran sodium sulfate-treated mice was immunostained for Muc2, and bacterial localisation in the mucus was analysed. All murine colitis models revealed bacteria in contact with the epithelium. Additional analysis of the less inflamed IL-10 −/− mice revealed a thicker mucus layer than wild-type, but the properties were different, as the inner mucus layer could be penetrated both by bacteria in vivo and by fluorescent beads the size of bacteria ex vivo. Clear separation between bacteria or fluorescent beads and the epithelium mediated by the inner mucus layer was also evident in normal human sigmoid colon biopsy samples. In contrast, mucus on colon biopsy specimens from patients with UC with acute inflammation was highly penetrable. Most patients with UC in remission had an impenetrable mucus layer similar to that of controls. Conclusions Normal human sigmoid colon has an inner mucus layer that is impenetrable to bacteria. The colon mucus in animal models that spontaneously develop colitis and in patients with active UC allows bacteria to penetrate and reach the epithelium. Thus colon mucus properties can be modulated, and this suggests a novel model of UC pathophysiology.