A vigorous debate exists among academics as to the impact of social media use (SMU) on well-being writ large. To date, research has found both positive and negative results, as well as no results, regarding the relationship between these two variables. Using a large, randomly selected sample of US adults across two annual waves of data, our findings suggest that SMU is negatively associated with physical and mental health (albeit weakly). Fixed R-squared was .047 and .049 for SMU as a predictor of physical and mental health, respectively. Currently, most research on SMU and well-being has focused on adolescents. A significant relationship between SMU and health contributes to the narrative that SMU may be associated with poorer perceptions of both physical and mental health. The study also finds that gender moderates this relationship. Women, as hypothesized, are more likely to report lower levels of physical and mental health from SMU than men. Our results also find a bidirectional relationship between SMU and health. Those reporting lower physical and/or mental health were more likely to use social media than those in better perceived health. And these results held across genders. Fixed R-squared was .097 for both mental and physical health. The study's findings have important implications for research in this area and for public policy.

INTRODUCTION:Irish farmers are recognized as a high-risk group for premature cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality compared to other occupation groups. To better characterize CVD risk within farming subpopulations, there is a need for real-world data examining socio-demographic, economic, and occupational determinants of cardiovascular risk. METHODS:This study reports baseline data from health checks and face-to-face questionnaire capturing socio-demographic and farm characteristics from the Farmers Have Hearts - Cardiovascular Health Program. Farmers were recruited at livestock marts, where live cattle are sold and bought through bidding and predominantly visited by beef farmers, and agri-branches, local retail outlets linked to agribusinesses, commonly visited by dairy farmers. Descriptive statistics characterized the sample, and regression analysis was performed with and without recruitment venue to examine its influence on associations between socio-demographic and cardiovascular risk factors. FINDINGS:Most farmers had a higher cardiovascular risk, with 74.0% having ≥4 CVD risk factors. Mart-recruited farmers had a significantly higher prevalence of multiple risk factors compared to agri-branch-recruited farmers (79.3% vs 68.8%). This disparity aligned with distinct socio-demographic profiles, as mart-recruited farmers were more likely to be older, single, have lower educational attainment, and operate smaller farms. Including recruitment venue in regression models changed associations between education and low HDL-C and between age and smoking, reflecting contextual influences beyond individual factors. CONCLUSION:This study demonstrates that cardiovascular risk is unequally distributed among Irish farmers, with mart-recruited farmers carrying a higher burden. Socio-demographic and occupational differences captured by recruitment venue influence cardiovascular risk, emphasizing the need for targeted health interventions, and agricultural health policy.

INTRODUCTION:Agricultural workplaces have a high number of incidents and fatalities, with the majority occurring from machinery use. Farmers' behaviour plays a critical role in maintaining safety, as improper or unsafe practices often lead to injuries and fatalities. This review categorises interventions targeting farm machine safety, examining both the behaviour change techniques (BCTs) used and their reported outcomes to understand how the techniques influence safety practices and outcomes on farms. METHODS:The systematic review is reported in accordance with the Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis guidelines. Seven electronic databases were searched for relevant studies published before June 2024, and the quality of included studies was assessed using Cochrane risk of bias assessment tools. Analysis of intervention behavioural components was guided by the behaviour change wheel framework and BCT taxonomy (v1). The findings were synthesised using a narrative review. RESULTS:Nine studies were included and a total of 21 BCTs were identified. The most frequently coded BCTs were 4.1 (instruction on how to perform the behaviour), 10.8 (incentive [outcome]), and 16.3 (vicarious consequences) (each n = 6). Reported outcomes included reductions in injury rates, improved adoption of safety devices, implementation of safety measures, and positive shifts in safety norms and perceptions. However, due to variations in intervention design and reporting, assessing the direct impact of specific BCTs on these outcomes proved challenging. DISCUSSION:The use of BCT taxonomy provided a common language for describing intervention components and enabled the standardisation of intervention content analysis. While patterns were observed regarding the commonly used BCTs, their implementation and outcomes, the heterogeneity and limited details provided by studies limited our ability to discern their effectiveness. Providing (i) greater transparency in reporting active intervention components and (ii) clearer connections between components and specific outcomes, will enable enhanced comparisons of future studies, and facilitate a greater understanding of how to support safe machine-related behaviours on farms.

OBJECTIVE:Measuring attitudes of farmers to safe farming practices using quantitative causal relationship approaches is central to improving understanding of (un)safe practices. This knowledge is important in the development of effective farm safety interventions. However, the accuracy of quantitative attitudinal studies in explaining farmers' decision-making faces a potential measurement challenge, i.e. a high level of optimism bias. In this paper, we present research that develops and tests farm safety attitudinal questions that are framed around "real-life" farming practices with the objective of reducing optimism bias. METHODS:We apply construal level theory (CLT) to support the design of vignettes that reflect common risk scenarios faced by farmers. Applying qualitative analysis of 274 fatal farm incidents that occurred in Ireland between 2004 and 2018 we identify the occupational behaviors (what farmers do), social (who are farmers), spatial (where farming takes place), and temporal (when farming happens) dimensions of risks resulting in most deaths. The results informed subsequent co-design activities with farm safety experts and farm advisors to develop "real-life" scenarios, attitudinal questions, and response options. The questionnaire was piloted and subsequently implemented to collect data from a sample of 381 farmers with either tractors or livestock. The results of the survey were compared to previous attitudinal research on farmer's attitudes to safety in Ireland to establish if there was as follows: i) increased variance in the responses, and ii) a statistically significant difference in the attitudes of respondents compared to the results reported in previous studies. RESULTS:The findings established that when farmers were provided with real-life scenarios, their responses were less optimistic and more varied, i.e. there was a greater range of responses, compared to previous studies. CONCLUSION:Applying CTL to the development of attitudinal survey instruments anchors attitudinal questions within farming specific occupational, social, spatial, and temporal contexts. The use of vignettes that draw on real-life scenarios offers the potential for improved design of surveys that seek to understand farmer/worker practices. The results suggest that this approach can improve the measurement of attitudes to farm safety.

Background: Tractors and quad bikes pose a significant risk of fatal injuries among farmers, particularly affecting older farmers. This study aimed to explore the barriers and facilitators to the adoption of machine related safety behaviors among older farmers in Irish farm settings. Method: Four focus groups were conducted via Zoom in February 2021. Nineteen Irish farmers from four farm types participated. The discussions were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using an inductive, reflexive thematic analysis approach. The themes identified were then mapped to the COM-B (Capability-Opportunity-Motivation) model, providing a systematic theoretical basis for designing a future intervention to reduce machine-related accidents. Results: The analysis identified five inductive themes that encompassed both barriers and facilitators in farm safety practices: (1) Capability to manage competing responsibilities; (2) Characteristics of the farm and its work environment; (3) Availability and affordability of resources; (4) Prevailing sociocultural opportunities; and (5) Perceived likelihood and cost-benefit analysis in safety decision-making. These themes captured the complex interplay of capability, opportunity, and motivation in farmers’ decision-making processes. The study also revealed limitations in existing interventions, such as voluntary guidelines and educational methods, in effectively addressing these barriers. Conclusions: Farmers’ abilities (capability), prevailing sociocultural factors, resource availability (opportunity), and their perceived consequences and benefits (motivation) affect how safely they work with machines. The study emphasizes the need for comprehensive, theory-driven approaches that consider the interplay of capability, opportunity, and motivational factors that may support or impede machine safety. Understanding the challenges faced by Irish farmers highlights potential strategies for safety intervention, and these strategies should be co-designed with farmers and attentive to the local context. Practical applications: The study provides a template for understanding farmers’ perspectives using the COM-B model. The findings can inform the development of theoretically informed intervention strategies based on the Behavior Change Wheel framework.

Download This Paper Open PDF in Browser Add Paper to My Library Share: Permalink Using these links will ensure access to this page indefinitely Copy URL Copy DOI

Phubbing (phone snubbing) has become the norm in (im)polite society. A vast majority of US adults report using their phones during a recent social interaction. Using one’s phone in the presence of others has been shown to have a negative impact on relationships among co-workers, friends, family, and romantic partners. Recent research suggests viewing short-form videos (SFVs) (e.g., TikTok) is more addictive/immersive than traditional social media (e.g., Facebook) leading to a greater likelihood of phubbing others. Across two studies, the present research investigates the relationship between SFV viewing and phubbing and the possible mediating effect of self-control. We also test whether TikTok has a stronger relationship with phubbing than Instagram Reels and YouTube Shorts, two popular SFV purveyors. Study 1 (282 college students) finds that viewing TikTok videos is positively associated with phubbing others and this relationship is mediated by self-control. Interestingly, Study 1 also finds that this relationship does not hold for Instagram Reels and YouTube shorts. Using two different measures of self-control, Study 2 (198 adults) provides additional support for the mediating effect of self-control on the SFV viewing—phubbing relationship. Again, the model is only supported for TikTok SFV viewing, not Instagram or YouTube. In sum, the viewing of carefully curated short TikTok videos, often 30–60 seconds in length, undermines self-control which is associated with increased phubbing behavior. Implications of the present study’s findings expand far beyond phubbing. Self-control plays a central role in nearly all human decision making and behavior. Suggestions for future research are offered.

The active social media use (ASMU) and passive social media use (PSMU) hypotheses suggest the impact of social media on perceived loneliness depends on how it is used. However, empirical studies examining the impact of ASMU and PSMU on loneliness are limited. Using a longitudinal study with a nationally representative sample of Dutch adults surveyed across nine annual waves, our findings lend support to the PSMU hypothesis, showing PSMU leads to higher loneliness over time. However, ASMU was not found to have the salubrious effects suggested by the ASMU hypothesis; instead ASMU was also positively associated with loneliness over time. Our findings bolster the emerging literature which suggests that social media, when used passively, may contribute to the epidemic of loneliness. However, it is premature to assume that active use of social media reduces loneliness. Our results also suggest that a bidirectional relationship exists between social media use and loneliness.

Rural communities have unique mental health needs and challenges which are often related to the uniqueness of the community itself. On a per-capita basis, the investment in rural mental health research is far less than that in urban communities. Added to this, rural communities are often at risk of researchers, based in large urban universities, visiting, conducting the research with minimal engagement with local stakeholders and limited understanding of the community's social-service-environmental context. Often this research leaves no visible benefit to the community with respect to increased knowledge, resources or community capacity. This commentary is based on the insights of a panel of authors from 9 countries, each with extensive experience of rural mental health research and work. And it seeks to stimulate the discourse on responsible rural mental health practice. The aim of this commentary is to provide a reference on research practice for novice and experienced researchers on rural mental health research and practice, to assist policymakers, government and funding bodies to establish appropriate standards and guidelines for rural mental health research, and support rural communities to advocate for equity of funding and sustainable research as they engage with researchers, funders and governments. The 10 standards in this declaration will help guide researchers toward research that is beneficial to rural communities and also help develop the local community's research capability, which ultimately will serve to enhance the mental health and well-being of rural communities.

ObjectiveGeneration of reliable data underpins the effectiveness of Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) surveillance systems. Despite the importance of understanding OHS data systems, there are few papers that provide overviews of their structure and/or content. This paper introduces a basic framework for assessing OHS data systems that will be of use to researchers internationally. We applied this approach to assess the Irish OHS data system by undertaking a data mapping exercise.MethodWe developed a checklist based on recommendations of monitoring and measurement of OHS proposed by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (USA). An assessment of published reports that present systematic OHS surveillance data was undertaken to identify the institutions or organisations responsible for collecting and curating the data, their remit, and, associated with this, their respective case definitions. We then provide an overview of the variables collected and these are then mapped against the checklist.ResultsThe assessment highlights that whilst the farm fatalities dataset provides complete coverage of all fatalities, regardless of age or employment status, the same is not true of the three non-fatal injuries datasets reviewed. There are important differences in the data collection methods and, associated with this, which populations are covered.Practical ApplicationThe assessment approach provides valuable insights into the strengths and weaknesses of a critical element of OHS surveillance systems, namely the production of datasets. This knowledge is important for researchers as understanding the data that informs their research is fundamental to good science. It is critical for policy-makers and other stakeholders to understand the strengths and weaknesses on which OHS policy, strategies, or education and training interventions are developed.

AbstractThis article offers critical reflections on the process of leading Horizon Europe research bids, drawing from the authors’ experiences with two funded projects: GRASS CEILING and SafeHabitus. It highlights the challenges and opportunities presented by multi‐actor research, which brings together researchers, policymakers, stakeholders and end users. We discuss strategies for developing and managing these partnerships, including approaches to participant compensation and engagement. We address the complexities of fitting research into the EU framework, noting how prescriptive call texts can sometimes limit innovative approaches. It raises questions about the role of academics in these projects, highlighting concerns about the potential for an instrumental approach to research that prioritises funding acquisition over intellectual curiosity. The authors provide recommendations for future co‐ordinators, emphasising the importance of clear communication, early deliverables to build team cohesion and showcasing participants from living labs or communities of practice. The article concludes with a call for honest debate about the significance of research within multi‐actor projects and suggests the development of mentoring systems for co‐ordinators.

Smartphone use has quickly become a fixture of everyday life, including during church services. Drawing from the Theory of Reasoned Action and the Technology Acceptance Model, we develop a model to identify key drivers of smartphone use during church services. Smartphone Playfulness was included in the model to reflect a more intrinsic motivation to use one's smartphone during church services. Study 1 surveys 329 US adults and finds that our newly developed model explains 66 percent of the variation in intentions to use one's smartphone during church services. A second study conducted six weeks later with 164 of the original respondents finds that behavioral intentions explains 44 percent of the variation in actual smartphone use. Findings suggest that the newly developed model presented herein is a valuable tool in explaining smartphone use in church and may prove helpful in explaining acceptance decisions across a wide variety of computer-based media technologies.

Partner phubbing (phone snubbing) is the perceived extent to which an individual uses or is distracted by his or her cellphone while in the company of his/her relationship partner. The present research examines the impact of partner phubbing on relationship satisfaction through an Expectancy Violations Theory perspective. Across two studies, including a survey of 180 adults currently in a romantic relationship, and an experiment of 141 married adults, results reveal that partner phubbing results in negative expectancy violations, which in turn lower relationship satisfaction. However, support is found for moderated mediation, such that the negative indirect effect of partner phubbing on relationship satisfaction depends on the phubber's level of partner reward value. When partner reward value is low, expectancy violations from partner phubbing have a strong negative effect on relationship satisfaction, but this effect is attenuated to non-significance when partner reward value is high.

Background In Ireland, the agriculture sector reports the highest number of fatalities even though farmers constitute only 6% of the working population. Tractor-related behaviours are implicated in 55% of all vehicle work-related fatalities and 25% of reported injuries, and many of these occur in farmyards. There is limited research on the feasibility and acceptability of behaviour change interventions to improve tractor safety. Target behaviours that promote safe operation in farmyards, determining and addressing blind spots of tractors, were identified, and an intervention was developed following the Behaviour Change Wheel Approach. The objective of the study is to examine the feasibility, fidelity and acceptability of a behaviour change intervention to enhance the safe operation of tractors in farmyards with a particular focus on tractor blind spots. Method A single group feasibility study will be undertaken. Approximately 16 farmers from four major farm types will be recruited for the study between August and September 2022. The intervention involves an in-person demo session, facilitated discussion and personalised safety training procedure with safety goals. The study will collect data from participants at three time points: baseline (3–10 days prior to the intervention), during the intervention and at the follow-up session (7–30 days post-intervention). Quantitative data will be collected through a pre-intervention interview and feedback surveys. A pre- and post-intervention qualitative interview will also be conducted with the participants and will be supplemented with qualitative data from recruitment logs, observational memos and logs and feedback from recruiters. Evaluation of the feasibility, acceptability and fidelity of the intervention will be guided by a pre-determined feasibility checklist, fidelity framework and theoretical framework of acceptability, respectively. Interviews will be analysed using the content analysis. Discussion The current study can determine the feasibility and fidelity of delivering a systematic, theoretically driven, tailored behaviour change intervention. It will also assess whether the intervention, its ingredients and delivery are acceptable to the farming population. This study will also inform the development of a future larger trial to test the effectiveness of the intervention. Trial registration ISRCTN Identifier: ISRCTN22219089. Date applied 29 July 2022

A transition to a more sustainable food production system in Europe has significant implications for the social constitution of rural spaces. Moreover, research has highlighted that engagement with sustainability initiatives can be affected by people's desire to maintain aspects of their current social realities pertaining to occupations, traditions and lifestyles. Farmers are central to a sustainable agricultural transition, yet are also socially embedded in the spaces that are targeted for transformation. This article engages with this dilemma through an exploration of farmer values in an upland farming area in Ireland. Specifically, we draw on qualitative case-study data to explore how farmers value their occupation, lifestyles and social structures in terms of the relationships in which they operate. We highlight a range of dimensions through which case-study farmers value farming-especially as autonomous, outdoor work-in terms of tacit skills and knowledge, familial legacies and certain forms of social organisation. Conceptually, this article builds on calls from within social sustainability scholarship to engage with social aspects of sustainable development. We develop and deploy a relational values analytic framework, which offers a simple yet effective lens for exploring farmer values in terms of the relationships through which they are generated and articulated. Through this framework, we explore how different individuals value their farming occupations and lifestyles. Moreover, by focusing on the relational dimension, we tease out the multiple and sometimes conflicting values that individuals navigate in relation to their farming occupations. We conclude that this kind of approach could enhance understanding of farmer engagement with (or resistance to) sustainable agriculture initiatives.

OPINION article Front. Public Health, 18 January 2023Sec. Children and Health Volume 10 - 2022 | https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2022.1074673

Introduction: Farmers in Ireland experience poor health outcomes and are considered ‘hard to reach’. Agricultural advisors (‘advisors’) are uniquely positioned to support and signpost farmers on health issues. This paper explores the acceptability and terms of reference of a potential health role for advisors, and offers key recommendations for developing a bespoke farmers’ health training programme.Methods: Following ethical approval, eleven focus groups (n=26 female, n=35 male, age-range 20s-70s) were conducted with farmers (n=4), advisors (n=4), farming organisations (n=2) and farmers’ ‘significant others’ (n=1). Utilizing Thematic Content Analysis, transcripts were coded iteratively and emerging themes were grouped into primary and subthemes.Results: Our analysis identified three themes. ‘Scope and acceptability of a potential health role for advisors’ examines how participants envision and are receptive to such a role. ‘Roles, responsibilities and boundaries’ considers both a health promotion and ‘health connector’ advisory role - normalising health conversations and signposting farmers to services/supports. Finally, ‘trouble-shooting potential obstacles to advisors assuming a health role’ reflects on the barriers that may impede advisors capacity or potential to have a broader health role.Discussion: Within the context of the stress process theory, findings provide unique insights into how advisory can mediate stress and contribute to farmers’ health and wellbeing. Finally, findings have important implications for potentially extending the reach of training to other aspects of farming support services (eg agri-banking, agri-business, veterinary services etc.), as well as serving as a springboard for the development of similar initiatives in other jurisdictions.

Introduction: This study addresses two main questions: 'How does having the experience of farming influence college students’ intrinsic motivations towards farm health and safety (FHS)?' and 'Are there any differences between the motivations reported by students with and without having such experience?'. This study seeks to investigate the role of farming experience in students’ cognitive factors and intentions to evaluate whether sharing experiences and stories positively shape students' cognitive factors to perform FHS behaviours.Methods: A cross-sectional online survey using a semi-structured questionnaire was assigned to a nationally representative sample of agricultural science students in Ireland (n= 430). Applying independent sample t-test and ANOVA test, multiple comparisons were made to examine if having the experience of farming affects FHS intrinsic motivations.Results: This study illustrated students without farming experience are less likely to perceive farming as a dangerous occupation while they reported a slightly positive attitude and intention compared with their counterparts with experience of farming. Our study illustrated students with experience of farming gave a lower priority to FHS and control over safety behaviour (pessimistic approach) and they reported a slightly higher level of risk perception (optimistic perception).Discussion: Having experience of farming (destructive experience - the experience of farming without having a near miss or injury or having heard of accidents, ie negative factors affecting students’ motivations) may not be necessarily a positive factor as risk-taking is admitted as a norm and a part of the nature of the work. Conversely, having experience of FHS issues (constructive experience - any kind of farming experience that positively shapes students' motivations towards FHS) can positively shape attitude, perceptions, and intention. Therefore, we recommend that constructive experiences (positive affecting intrinsic motivations) should be incorporated into the FHS training of students through peer-to-peer sharing as this enhances attitudes, perceptions, and willingness of the majority of students.

IntroductionFormal farm safety education/training should be tailored, in terms of the approach, content and delivery, to students undertaking agriculture education and training to enhance Farm-related Injury Risk Perception (FIRP). To this end, this paper assesses factor(s) explaining or predicting levels of FIRP amongst students studying for a degree in agriculture science.MethodsA cross-sectional online survey was conducted with a nationally representative sample of Bachelor of Agriculture Science (BAgrSc) students (N = 417) (aged 18–20) in Ireland. Descriptive [frequency and cross-tabulations) and inferential (Ordinal Logistic Regression (OLR)] analyses were applied to evaluate the effects of social influences, experience (of farming, of a near-miss or injury), and awareness (of others who were injured or killed on the farm) on FIRP.ResultsThe study found that social influences negatively affected FIRP (P < 0.05). A relatively small number of students reported experiencing an injury (n = 56, 13.4%) that resulted in them being unable to participate in educational or social activities. A quarter of the respondents did, however, record experiencing a near-miss/close call (n = 106, 25.4%). A notable proportion (n = 144, 34.5%) of students had personal connections to someone who died as a consequence of a farm-related incident and 56.4% (n = 235) knew someone who was moderately or severely injured. OLR findings established that experiencing a severe injury, having a near-miss or close call, and awareness of a farm-related death or injury positively affects FIRP (P < 0.05).ConclusionsPerception of farm risks amongst students in Ireland is low. Students who recorded higher levels of risk perception were, however, more likely to report experiencing a near-miss, close call or severe injury, or knowing someone who experienced a farm-related injury or fatality. Farmers, family or friends were found to negatively impact the FIRP and this reflects previous research findings. Our findings highlight the need for education and training programs to enhance opportunities for student peer-to-peer learning through sharing of experiences and/or knowledge of farm injuries and/or fatalities. Such activities will enhance awareness and understanding amongst the general population of students leading to increased FIRP and contribute to a reduction in risk-taking.