Objective To provide an estimated cost-benefit ratio for the Expanded Food and Nutrition Education Program (EFNEP), based on potential prevention of diet-related chronic diseases and conditions. Design A retrospective cost-benefit study using demographic, food/nutrient intake, and food-related behavioral data previously collected on program participants by trained paraprofessionals, before and after an intervention. Actual costs of implementing EFNEP for 1 year (1996) were also used. Subjects/Settings 3100 female and male adults who had participated in the Virginia EFNEP during 1996. Intervention Prior participation in 6 to 12 food/nutrition education lessons with subsequent graduation from EFNEP. Main Outcome Measures Cost-benefit ratios for EFNEP, based on original assumptions and subsequent sensitivity analyses. Statistical Analysis Program implementation costs were compiled and compared with monetized benefits of disease prevention to produce benefit-to-cost ratios. Excel and SPSS computer programs were used to compute cost-benefit ratios based on standard procedures used in the field of economics. Results The initial benefit-to-cost ratio was $10.64/$1.00, with subsequent sensitivity analyses producing ratios ranging from $2.66/1.00 to $17.04/1.00. Implications The results of EFNEP intervention translate into a positive cost-benefit based on potential prevention of diet-related chronic diseases and conditions. Thus, EFNEP is a good use of federal tax dollars.

Hodgkinson and Edelstein (Aug. 72) create the impression that college and university officials are either careless or ignorant in responding to questionnaires. An alternative perspective is that careless or ignorant questionnaire construction precludes responses. Questionnaire items are frequently worded in such general terms that one must guess what the questioner is trying to ascertain. Few questionnaires appear to have been pretested, and probably even fewer have any data on reliability before they are distributed.

Journal of Clinical PsychologyVolume 27, Issue 1 p. 143-145 Psychotherapeutic Processes Counseling outcome criteria and the question of dimensionality Kirk E. Farnsworth, Kirk E. Farnsworth University of New HampshireSearch for more papers by this authorEdwin C. Lewis, Edwin C. Lewis Iowa State UniversitySearch for more papers by this authorJames A. Walsh, James A. Walsh Iowa State UniversitySearch for more papers by this author Kirk E. Farnsworth, Kirk E. Farnsworth University of New HampshireSearch for more papers by this authorEdwin C. Lewis, Edwin C. Lewis Iowa State UniversitySearch for more papers by this authorJames A. Walsh, James A. Walsh Iowa State UniversitySearch for more papers by this author First published: January 1971 https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-4679(197101)27:1<143::AID-JCLP2270270136>3.0.CO;2-CAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onEmailFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat No abstract is available for this article. References 1 Block, J. and Thomas, H. Is satisfaction with self a measure of adjustment? J. abn. soc. Psychol., 1955, 51, 254–259. 2 Campbell, D. P. A counseling evaluation with a “better” control group. J. counsel. Psychol., 1963, 10, 334–339. 3 Farnsworth, K. E. Application of scaling techniques to the evaluation of counseling outcomes. Psychol. Bull., 1966, 66, 81–93. 4 Frank, J. D. Persuasion and Healing. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1961. 5 Froehlich, C. P. A criterion for counseling. Psychol. Monogr., 1957, 71, No. 15 (Whole No. 444). 6 Gonyea, G. G. Appropriateness-of-vocational-choice as a criterion of counseling outcome. J. counsel. Psychol., 1962, 9, 213–219. 7 Goodstein, L. D. and Grigg, A. E. Client satisfaction, counselors, and the counseling process. Personnel guid. J., 1959, 38, 19–24. 8 Horst, P. Factor Analysis of Data Matrices. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1965. 9 Kaczkowski, H. R. and Rothney, J. W. M. Discriminant analysis in evaluation of counseling. Personnel guid. J., 1956, 35, 231–235. 10 Kiesler, D. J. Some myths of psychotherapy research and the search for a paradigm. Psychol. Bull., 1966, 65, 110–136. 11 O'Dea, J. D. and Zeran, F. R. Effects of counseling. Personnel guid. J., 1953, 31, 241–244. 12 Super, D. E. Theory of vocational development. Amer. Psychol., 1953, 8, 185–190. 13 Taylor, D. M. Changes in the self concept without psychotherapy. J. consult. Psychol., 1955, 19, 205–209. 14 Tyler, Leona, E. The Work of the Counselor. ( 2nd ed.) New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1961. 15 Wrenn, C. G. Comments on current books and the passing scene. J. counsel. Psychol., 1966, 13, 123–128. Volume27, Issue1January 1971Pages 143-145 ReferencesRelatedInformation

The extent to which college programs meet the needs and goals of women students has not been established. In this study, a sample of students and alumnae of the College of Home Economics, Iowa State University, responded to a set of attitude scales concerning their reactions to courses in their core curriculum. Factor analysis of the person‐course interactions revealed 6 factors which were tentatively defined in terms of the courses loading most heavily on each. Implications for improved educational planning of women are discussed.

With the strain that increased enrollments are placing on the resources of many colleges and universities, these institutions are becoming more concerned with minimizing the inefficiency arising from student transfers. To both the student and the college, a transfer represents loss of time and money-whether the shift is between institutions or within a university. Perhaps nowhere is transfer a more disturbing problem than in colleges of engineering. Induced by propaganda extolling the rewards of an engineering career, many young men enter engineering programs with unrealistic conceptions both of their own abilities and interest and of the demands of these programs. The result is that these curricula tend to lose more students by transfer than they gain. Saddler (1950) found that these transferring-out students tended to score differently on the Strong Vocational Interest Blank for Men from the students who remained in engineering. Differences between graduates and nongraduates of engineering programs have been found on the Kuder Preference Record (Reid and others, 1962). It has also been established that graduates of the various engineering curricula within a college can be differentiated according to their interest profiles (Reed, Lewis, and Wolins, 1960). The present study was designed to discover whether the interest patterns of students entering the engineering program of a specific university differed according to the ultimate academic outcomes (within that university) of the students. It extends the findings of the studies cited above by considering these outcomes in more detail.

The Personnel and Guidance JournalVolume 42, Issue 6 p. 593-598 Some Correlates of Homemaking vs. Career Preference Among College Home Economics Students LOUISE VETTER, LOUISE VETTER member of the staff Department of Psychology, Iowa State University, Ames.Search for more papers by this authorEDWIN C. LEWIS, EDWIN C. LEWIS Associate Professor Department of Psychology, Iowa State University, Ames.Search for more papers by this author LOUISE VETTER, LOUISE VETTER member of the staff Department of Psychology, Iowa State University, Ames.Search for more papers by this authorEDWIN C. LEWIS, EDWIN C. LEWIS Associate Professor Department of Psychology, Iowa State University, Ames.Search for more papers by this author First published: February 1964 https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2164-4918.1964.tb04708.xCitations: 14AboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditWechat Citing Literature Volume42, Issue6February 1964Pages 593-598 RelatedInformation

The Personnel and Guidance JournalVolume 38, Issue 7 p. 571-573 Differential Interest Patterns of Engineering Graduates WOODROW W. REED, WOODROW W. REED Woodrow W. Reed and Edwin C. Lewis are Assistant Professors in the Department of Psychology, and Leroy Wolins is Assistant Professor in the Department of Pychology and Statistics, Iowa State College, Ames.Search for more papers by this authorEDWIN C. LEWIS, EDWIN C. LEWIS Woodrow W. Reed and Edwin C. Lewis are Assistant Professors in the Department of Psychology, and Leroy Wolins is Assistant Professor in the Department of Pychology and Statistics, Iowa State College, Ames.Search for more papers by this authorLEROY WOLINS, LEROY WOLINS Woodrow W. Reed and Edwin C. Lewis are Assistant Professors in the Department of Psychology, and Leroy Wolins is Assistant Professor in the Department of Pychology and Statistics, Iowa State College, Ames.Search for more papers by this author WOODROW W. REED, WOODROW W. REED Woodrow W. Reed and Edwin C. Lewis are Assistant Professors in the Department of Psychology, and Leroy Wolins is Assistant Professor in the Department of Pychology and Statistics, Iowa State College, Ames.Search for more papers by this authorEDWIN C. LEWIS, EDWIN C. LEWIS Woodrow W. Reed and Edwin C. Lewis are Assistant Professors in the Department of Psychology, and Leroy Wolins is Assistant Professor in the Department of Pychology and Statistics, Iowa State College, Ames.Search for more papers by this authorLEROY WOLINS, LEROY WOLINS Woodrow W. Reed and Edwin C. Lewis are Assistant Professors in the Department of Psychology, and Leroy Wolins is Assistant Professor in the Department of Pychology and Statistics, Iowa State College, Ames.Search for more papers by this author First published: March 1960 https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2164-4918.1960.tb02609.xCitations: 4 AboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Citing Literature Volume38, Issue7March 1960Pages 571-573 RelatedInformation

Agricultural experts have argued that for the Cooperative Extension System to remain viable, they must address globalization issues through local Extension programs. The purpose of this study was to assess the attitudes of Virginia Cooperative Extension (VCE) faculty toward globalizing their programming efforts. The study also ascertained information related to VCE faculty's current involvement in globally-focused activities as well as barriers to globalizing programming efforts. The web-based survey instrument used for this study included four sections: 1) Employee Profile, 2) Involvement in International Activities, 3) Attitudes towards Global Issues, and 4) Perceived Barriers to Globalizing Extension Programs. The target audience for this study was all VCE faculty members (N = 332). Two hundred and six faculty members completed the on-line survey; 205 of the surveys were usable. This represents a return rate of 62%. The data revealed that 92 percent of the respondents were involved in international efforts within the past five years. The data also revealed an attitude mean score of 2.9 on a scale of one to four, with four being the most positive. Furthermore, the top two barriers to globalizing VCE programs, as identified by respondents, were "lack of financial support" and "not a programming priority".