Letteratura scientifica selezionata sul tema "Anderson, anne , 1936?-"

Torbjörn Ahlström: Underjordiska dödsriken – Humanosteologiska studier av neolitiska kollektivgravar.(Niels H. Andersen)Søren H. Andersen: Ronæs Skov. Marin­arkæologiske undersøgelser af kystboplads fra Ertebølletid.(Anders Fischer)Hans Andersson, Gitte Hansen og Ingvild Øye (red.): De første 200 årene – nyt blikk på 27 skandinaviske middelalderbyer. (Hans Krongaard Kristensen)Magnus Artursson: Bebyggelse och samhällsstruktur. Södra och mellersta Skandinavien under senneolitikum och bronsålder 2300-500 f.Kr.(Martin Egelund Poulsen)Pauline Asingh: Grauballemanden – ­portræt af et moselig.(Morten Ravn)Karl-Ernst Behre: Landschaftsgeschichte Norddeutschlands. Umwelt und Siedlung von der Steinzeit bis zur Gegenwart.(Sabine Karg og Bent Aaby)Karen M. Boe, Torsten Capelle og Christian Fischer (red.): Tollundmandens verden – Kontinentale kontakter i tidlig jernalder.(Jeanette Varberg)Linda Boye & Ulla Lund Hansen (eds.): Wealth and Prestige. An Analysis of Rich Graves from Late Roman Iron Age on Eastern Zealand, Denmark.(Jørgen Lund)Andres Siegfried Dobat: Werkzeuge aus kaiserzeitlichen Heeresausrüstungsopfern. Mit besonderer Berücksichtigung der Fundplätze Illerup Ådal und Vimose.(Martin Rundkvist)K. Eliasen, E.B. Fisker, E. Hædersdal, P. Kristiansen, M.G. Krogh & M. Vedsø (red.): Bygningsarkæologiske Studier 2006-2008.(Lars Krants)Anton Englert og Athena Trakadas (red.): Wulfstan’s Voyage. The Baltic Sea region in the early Viking Age as seen from shipboard.(Sarah Croix)Berit Valentin Eriksen (red.): Lithic Technology in Metal Using Societies.(Jan Apel)Palle Eriksen, Torben Egebjerg, Lis Helles Olesen og Hans Rostholm: Vikinger i Vest. – Vikingetiden i Vestjylland.(Søren M. Sindbæk)Thomas Eriksson: Kärl och social gestik. Keramik I Mälardalen 1500 BC-400 AD.(Julie Lolk)Hermann Fabini: Die Kirchenburgen der Siebenbürger Sachsen.(Hans Skov)Frands Herschend: The Early Iron Age in South Scandinavia. Social Order in Settlement and Landscape.(Mads Kähler Holst)Charlotta Hillerdal: People in Between. Ethnicity and Material Identity – a New Approach to Deconstructed Concepts. (Charlotte Damm)Xenia Pauli Jensen og Lars Christian Nørbach: Illerup Ådal 13, Die Bögen, Pfeile und Äxte.(Ole Nielsen)Rud Kjems: Niels Sørensen. Træhandleren der tolkede skåltegnene.(Sven Thorsen)Iben Skibsted Klæsøe (red.): Viking ­Trade and Settlement in Continental Europe.(Poul Baltzer Heide)Jan Peder Lamm, Sigrid Frizlen, ­Romas Jaročkis, Gintautas Zabiela (eds.): Apuolė. Ausgrabungen und Funde 1928-1932.(Marika Mägi)Åsa M. Larsson: Breaking & Making Bodies and Pots. Material and Ritual Practices in Sweden in the Third Millennium BC.(Niels H. Andersen)Jesper Laursen og Lars Jørgensen (red.): Dronning Margrethe og arkæologien.(Anne Knudsen)Johan Ling: Elevated Rock Art. Towards a maritime understanding of rock art in northern Bohuslän, Sweden.(Richard Bradley)Jan Skamby Madsen & Lutz Klassen: Fribrødre Å. A late 11th century ship-handling site on Falster. (Christer Westerdahl)Rikke Malmros: Vikingernes syn på militær og samfund belyst gennem skjaldenes fyrstedigtning.(Thomas Lindkvist, Bjørn Poulsen og Kurt Villads Jensen)Camilla Mordhorst: Genstandshistorier. Fra Museum Wormianum til de moderne ­museer.(Martin Brandt Djupdræt)Eigil Nikolajsen: Vikingeskibet og Apotekeren(Karsten Kjer Michaelsen)Ebbe Nyborg og Jens Vellev (red.): hikuin 36. Kirkearkæologi i Norden 9.(Henriette Rensbro)Bodil Petersson & Peter Skoglund (red.): Arkeologi och identitet.(Tim Flohr Sørensen)Sissel F. Plathe og Jens Bruun: ­Danmarks Middelalderlige Altertavler – og anden billedbærende kirkeudsmykning af betydning for liturgien og den private andagt.(Hans Krongaard Kristensen)Mads Runge: Nørre Hedegård. En nordjysk byhøj fra ældre jernalder.(Jes Martens)Per Ole Schovsbo: Tranbær Mosefund 1875-96.(Jørgen Lund)Joachim Schultze: Haithabu – Die Siedlungsgrabungen. I. Methoden und Möglichkeiten der Auswertung. (Hans Skov)Martin Segschneider (red.): Ringwälle und verwandte Strukturen des ersten Jahrtausends n. Chr. an Nord- und Ostsee.(Silke Eisenschmidt)Ingrid Stoumann: Ryttergraven fra Grimstrup – og andre vikingetidsgrave ved Esbjerg.(Jens Jeppesen)Vivian Wangen: Gravfeltet på Gunnarstorp i Sarpborg, Østfold. Et monument over dødsriter og kultutøvelse i yngre bronsealder og eldste jernalder.(Anders Kaliff)Viggo Nielsen: Oldtidsagre i Danmark. Sjælland, Møn og Lolland-Falster.(Michael Vinter)

BackgroundAutoantibodies to citrullinated protein (ACPA; measured as anti-CCP; aCCP) and rheumatoid factor (RF) appear years before clinical onset of RA and are essential tools in today’s classification criteria for RA. In animal models, antibodies to joint specific proteins (JP) can induce arthritis, and they are also present at onset of RA [1]. As there is a need for increased precision for early diagnosis of RA as well as identification of different subtypes of the disease, we aim to assess whether autoantibodies to native or modified JP can be used for early and precise diagnosis of RA.ObjectivesTo study whether antibodies to JP, alone or in combination with ACPA/RF, could increase the diagnostic sensitivity and specificity in untreated early (ue)RA patients.MethodsAntibodies to JP were analysed in serum from patients in three independent ueRA cohorts as well as from population controls without rheumatic diseases (WINGA, Gothenburg and MFM-ÅUS, Malmö n=1062). ERAp (n=66), the smallest and most recent cohort was chosen for screening, and BARFOT and TIRA-2 (n=1939) for validation. We have developed a bead-based multianalyte flow immunoassay [2] and screened approx. 350 peptides derived from JPs of interest. We included monoclonal antibodies as assay calibrators and determined limit of detection (LoD). To assess positivity for autoantibodies to JP of interest above LoD, we used 5MAD (median absolute deviation) of the control populations as the cut-off.ResultsIn the ERAp cohort, 5 autoantibodies discriminated RA patients from controls with 81% sensitivity and 100% specificity (Table 1). The same autoantibodies had 68% sensitivity and 98% specificity in the combined BARFOT and TIRA-2 cohorts. Together with RF and aCCP, only 2 of the 5 autoantibodies added statistically significant diagnostic value, increasing the sensitivity from 48% to 61% with 99% specificity. In aCCP- and RF-negative ueRA patients (n=536), the novel biomarkers identified 22.5% of the patients with 99% specificity compared to controls.Table 1.Diagnostic capacity of the joint-specific antibodiesTest panelPerformanceGroup of patientsaCCP+RF+JP+SensitivitySpecificityAUC(ROC)ERApAll patients (n=66)--X81%100%89%RF and aCCP-neg patients (n=7)1------BARFOT and TIRA-2, combined dataAll patients (N=1939)--X68%98%86%All patients (N=1939)X--58%99%78%All patients (N=1939)2XX-48%100%84%All patients (N=1939)2, 3XXX61%99%86%RF and/or aCCP-pos patients (N=1403)--X84%99%93%RF and aCCP-neg patients (N=536)--X22%99%67%RA, literature valuesAnti-CCP testXN/AN/A53–71%95–96%N/A1Not analysed due to lack of power2This patient population is both aCCP+ and RF+3Only 2 of the 5 autoantibodies added statistically significant to the diagnostic valueAUC, Area under the curve; ROC, receiver operating characteristic curve; N/A, not applicable. Controls without rheumatic diseases: N=935 for BARFOT / TIRA-2 and N=27 for ERAp.ConclusionAutoantibodies to JP discriminate ueRA patients better then aCCP and RF alone and add an increased diagnostic value in particular for seronegative patients.References[1]Holmdahl, R., V. Malmstrom, and H. Burkhardt, Autoimmune priming, tissue attack and chronic inflammation - the three stages of rheumatoid arthritis. Eur J Immunol, 2014. 44(6): p. 1593-9.[2]Viljanen, J., et al., Synthesis of an Array of Triple-Helical Peptides from Type II Collagen for Multiplex Analysis of Autoantibodies in Rheumatoid Arthritis. ACS Chem Biol, 2020. 15(9): p. 2605-2615. Correction: ACS Chem Biol, 2020. 15(11): p. 3072AcknowledgementsBARFOT study group.Disclosure of InterestsErik Lönnblom: None declared, Monica Leu Agelii: None declared, Outi Sareila Employee of: Part time employee in Vacara AB, Ingiäld Hafström: None declared, Maria Andersson: None declared, Lei Cheng: None declared, Göran Bergström: None declared, Anna-Karin H Ekwall: None declared, Anna Rudin: None declared, Alf Kastbom: None declared, Christopher Sjowall: None declared, Bingze Xu: None declared, Lennart T.H. Jacobsson: None declared, Johan Viljanen: None declared, Jan Kihlberg: None declared, Inger Gjertsson: None declared, Rikard Holmdahl Shareholder of: Rikard Holmdahl the founder of Vacara AB.

Hans Andersson & Jes Wienberg (red.): Medeltiden och arkeologien. Mer än sex decennier.(Mette Svart Kristiansen)Birgit Arrhenius & Uaininn O’Meadhra (eds.): Excavations at Helgö XVIII – Conclusions and New Aspects.(Margrethe Watt)Mogens Bencard m.fl. (red.): Ribe Excavations 1970-76, Vol. 1-6.(Olaf Olsen)J. Benjamin, C. Bonsall, C. Pickard & A. Fischer: Submerged Prehistory.(Felix Riede & Peter Moe Astrup)Hans Browall: Alvastra Pålbyggnad, 1909-1930 års utgrävningar.(Rune Iversen)Aleksander Bursche: Illerup Ådal 14. Die Münzen.(Helle Horsnæs)Martin Carver & Jan Klápštĕ (eds.): The Archaeology of Medieval Europe, 2, Twelfth to Sixteenth Centuries.(Jes Wienberg)Inge Bødker Enghoff: Regionality and biotope exploitation in Danish Ertebølle and adjoining periods.(Kenneth Ritchie)Vivian Etting: The royal castles of Denmark during the 14th century - an analysis of the major royal castles with special regard to their functions and strategic importance.(Lars Meldgaard Sass Jensen)Ingo Gabriel & Torsten Kempke: Starigard/Oldenburg – Hauptburg der Slawen in Wagrien, bd. VI, Die Grabfunde. Einführung und archäologisches Material.(Silke Eisenschmidt)James Graham-Campbell, Søren M. Sindbæk og Gareth Williams (red.): Silver Economies, Monetisation and Society in Scandinavia, AD 800-1100.(Claus Feveile)Poul Grinder-Hansen: Søren Abildgaard (1718-1791). Fortiden på tegnebrættet.(Else Roesdahl)Martin Hansson, Jan Kock & Jens Vellev (red.): Renæssanceglas i Norden.(Vivi Jensen)Wilhelm Heizmann & Morten Axboe (Hrsg.): Die Goldbrakteaten der Völkerwanderungszeit – Auswertung und Neufund.(Ulla Lund Hansen)Felix Jakobson: Die Brandgräberfelder von Daumen und Kellaren im Kreise Allenstein, Ostpr.(Karen Høilund Nielsen)Volgker Hilber: Masurische Bügelfibeln. Studien zu den Fernbeziehungen der völkerwanderungszeitlichen Brandgräberfelder von Daumen und Kellaren.(Karen Høilund Nielsen)Lis Helles Olesen, Henrik Dupont & Claus Dam: Luftfotos over Danmark. Luftfotoserier i private og offentlige arkiver.(Michael Vinter)Martin Rundkvist: Mead-halls of the Eastern Geats. Elite Settlements and Political Geography AD 375-1000 in Östergötland, Sweden.(Mads Dengsø Jessen)Lothar Schulte: Die Fibeln mit hohem Nadelhalter (Almgren Gruppe VII).(Rasmus Birch Iversen)Annette Siegmüller: Die Ausgrabungen auf der frühmittelalterlichen Wurt Hessens in Wilhelmshaven.(Morten Søvsø)Katrin Struckmeyer: Die Knochen- und Geweihgeräte der Feddersen Wierde. Gebrauchsspurenanalysen an Geräten von der Römischen Kaiserzeit bis zum Mittelalter und ethno­archäologische Vergleiche.(Anna S. Beck)Karsten Vibild: Kirke i købstad. Ny historie om gammelt hus. Køge Sct. Nicolai.(Morten Larsen)

Abstract Background: KEYNOTE-522 (NCT03036488) is a phase 3 study of neoadjuvant pembro + chemo vs placebo + chemo, followed by adjuvant pembro vs placebo in patients with early-stage TNBC. The primary analysis showed a statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in event-free survival (EFS) with pembro + chemo followed by pembro. To assess the robustness and consistency of the primary EFS result, prespecified sensitivity and subgroup analyses for EFS were performed. Methods: Patients with previously untreated, non-metastatic, centrally confirmed TNBC (stage T1c N1-2 or T2-4 N0-2 per AJCC) were randomized 2:1 to pembro 200 mg Q3W or placebo, both given with 4 cycles of paclitaxel + carboplatin, then with 4 cycles of doxorubicin or epirubicin + cyclophosphamide (neoadjuvant phase). After definitive surgery, patients received pembro or placebo for 9 cycles or until recurrence or unacceptable toxicity (adjuvant phase). Patients were stratified by nodal status (positive or negative), tumor size (T1/T2 or T3/T4), and carboplatin schedule (Q3W or QW). Dual primary endpoints are pCR rate and EFS. Five prespecified sensitivity analyses for EFS were performed, including 2 that assessed the impact of different censoring rules and 3 that assessed the impact of different event definitions. Treatment effects on EFS were examined in prespecified patient subgroups defined by nodal involvement (positive or negative), disease stage (II or III), menopausal status (pre-menopausal or post-menopausal), HER2 status (2+ by IHC but FISH- or 0-1+ by IHC), and LDH (>ULN or ≤ULN). Results: Among 1174 patients randomized, 784 were randomly assigned to the pembro + chemo group and 390 were randomly assigned to the placebo + chemo group. Median follow-up was 39.1 months at the time of the March 23, 2021 data cutoff. The benefit of neoadjuvant pembro + chemo followed by adjuvant pembro vs neoadjuvant chemo alone was generally consistent with the primary EFS results for all five sensitivity analyses and in each subgroup evaluated (Table). Conclusion: EFS sensitivity analyses show a robust treatment benefit of neoadjuvant pembro + chemo followed by adjuvant pembro for previously untreated non-metastatic TNBC. This benefit was generally consistent across a broad selection of patient subgroups. Table. EFS Sensitivity and Subgroup Analyses in KEYNOTE-522EFS Analyses (ITT Population)Pembro + Chemo n/N (%)*Placebo + Chemo n/N (%)*HR (95% CI)†Primary Analysis‡123/784 (15.7)93/390 (23.8)0.63 (0.48 - 0.82)Sensitivity Analyses1. Alternate censoring rules§112/784 (14.3)84/390 (21.5)0.64 (0.48 - 0.84)2. “New anticancer therapy for metastatic disease” considered an EFS event123/784 (15.7)93/390 (23.8)0.63 (0.48 - 0.82)3. “Positive margin at last surgery” removed from EFS definition122/784 (15.6)90/390 (23.1)0.65 (0.50 - 0.85)4. “Positive margin at last surgery” and “second primary malignancy” removed from EFS definition116/784 (14.8)88/390 (22.6)0.63 (0.48 - 0.84)5. “Second breast malignancy” included in EFS definition126/784 (16.1)95/390 (24.4)0.63 (0.48 - 0.82)Subgroup AnalysesNodal involvement‖Positive80/408 (19.6)57/196 (29.1)0.65 (0.46 - 0.91)Negative43/376 (11.4)36/194 (18.6)0.58 (0.37 - 0.91)Overall disease stageII69/590 (11.7)54/291 (18.6)0.60 (0.42 - 0.86)III54/194 (27.8)39/98 (39.8)0.68 (0.45 - 1.03)Menopausal statusPre-menopausal60/438 (13.7)47/221 (21.3)0.62 (0.42 - 0.91)Post-menopausal63/345 (18.3)46/169 (27.2)0.64 (0.44 - 0.93)HER2 status2+ by IHC (but FISH-)32/188 (17.0)24/104 (23.1)0.73 (0.43 - 1.24)0-1+ by IHC91/595 (15.3)69/286 (24.1)0.60 (0.44 - 0.82)LDH>ULN29/149 (19.5)23/80 (28.8)0.65 (0.37 - 1.12)≤ULN93/631 (14.7)69/309 (22.3)0.63 (0.46 - 0.86)*Number of events/total number of patients (%). †Hazard ratios (HR) and 95% CIs in the primary analysis and sensitivity analyses were based on a stratified Cox regression model; analyses in subgroups were based on an unstratified Cox model. ‡EFS was defined as the time from randomization to the time of first documentation of disease progression that precludes definitive surgery, local or distant recurrence, a second primary cancer or death from any cause, whichever occurs first; patients who did not experience an event at the time of data cutoff were censored at the date they were last known to be alive and event-free. §Events after 2 consecutive missed disease assessments or initiation of post-surgery new anticancer therapy were censored at last disease assessment prior to the earlier date of ≥2 consecutive missed disease assessments and initiation of post-surgery new anticancer therapy; if no events before new anticancer therapy, events were censored at last disease assessment before initiation of post-surgery new anticancer treatment. ‖Determined by the study investigator by physical exam, sonography/MRI and/or biopsy. Data cutoff: March 23, 2021. Citation Format: Peter Schmid, Javier Cortes, Rebecca Dent, Lajos Pusztai, Heather McArthur, Sherko Kümmel, Jonas Bergh, Carsten Denkert, Yeon Hee Park, Rina Hui, Nadia Harbeck, Masato Takahashi, Michael Untch, Peter A. Fasching, Fatima Cardoso, Jay Andersen, Debra Patt, Michael Danso, Marta Ferreira, Marie-Ange Mouret-Reynier, Seock-Ah Im, Jin-Hee Ahn, Maria Gion, Sally Baron-Hay, Jean-Francois Boileau, Yalin Zhu, Wilbur Pan, Konstantinos Tryfonidis, Vassiliki Karantza, Joyce O’Shaughnessy. KEYNOTE-522 study of neoadjuvant pembrolizumab + chemotherapy vs placebo + chemotherapy, followed by adjuvant pembrolizumab vs placebo for early-stage TNBC: Event-free survival sensitivity and subgroup analyses [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2021 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2021 Dec 7-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(4 Suppl):Abstract nr GS1-01.

This paper presents basic theoretical knowledge of critical thinking. It describes characteristics of critical thinking, which are used for the formation of critical thinking indicators. These indicators are needed for assessing students’ critical thinking levels and for designing lessons to develop critical thinking competence for students. The paper articulates arguments for highlighting the necessity of critical thinking education for students in Vietnam. The paper contributes to knowledge base of critical thinking education and supports further studies on critical thinking in order to enhance the effectiveness of education in Vietnam. Key words Critical thinking, competence, education, students References Arend, B. (2009). Encouraging critical thinking in online threaded discussions. The Journal of Educators Online, 6(1), doi: 10.1.1.412.1694Bacon, F. (1605). The Advancement of Learning. Edited by Joseph Devey, M.A. (New York: P.F. Collier and Son, 1901).Bailin, S. (2002). Critical thinking and science education. Science & Education, Vol. 11, Issue 4, pp 362-375Bailin, S., Case, R., Coombs, J. R., & Daniels, L. B. (1999). Conceptualizing critical thinking. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 31(3), 285–302. Beyer, B. K. (1995). Critical thinking. Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappa Educational Foundation. Biggs, J., 1996. Western misperceptions of the Confucian-heritage learning culture. In D. Watkins & J. Biggs (Eds.), The Chinese learner: Cultural, psychological and contextual influences (pp. 45 – 67). Hong Kong: The University of Hong Kong Comparative Education Research Centre.Bloom B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Handbook I: The Cognitive Domain. New York: David McKay Co Inc. Bộ Giáo dục và Đào tạo (2018). Dự thảo Chương trình Giáo dục Phổ thông Tổng thể.Brookfield, S. D. (1987). Developing Critical Thinkers. Jossey-Bass, San FranciscoChan, S. (1999). The Chinese learning – A question of style. Education and Training, 41(6/7), 294-304.Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of education. New York: Macmillan. Đặng Tự Ân, 2015. Mô hình trường học mới Việt Nam nhìn từ góc độ thực tiễn và lí luận. NXB Giáo dục Việt NamĐỗ Đình Hoan (2002). Một số vấn đề cơ bản của chương trình tiểu học mới. NXB Giáo dục Việt NamEnnis, R. H. (1986). A concept of critical thinking. Havard Educational Review, 22(1): 81-111. Facione, P. A. (2011). Think Critically, Pearson Education: Englewood Cliffs, NJ.Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W., (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The internet and higher education, 2(2-3): 87-105Guyton, J. J. (1984). The effects of teaching cognitive strategies on problem solving skills of baccalaureate nursing students. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Toledo, OH, 1983). Dissertation Abstracts International. 44. 3587-A.Halpern, D. F. (2006). Is intelligence critical thinking? Why we need a new construct definition for intelligence. In P. Kyllonen, I. Stankov, & R. D. Roberts (Eds.), Extending intelligence: Enhancement and new constructs. Mahwah. NJ: Erlbaum Associates. Harman, K., & Bich, N. T. N. (2010). Reforming teaching and learning in Vietnam’s higher education system. In G. Harman, M. Hayden, & T. N. Pham (Eds.). Reforming higher education in Vietnam: Challenges and priorities (pp.65-86). London: SpringerHenri, F. (1991). Computer conferencing and content analysis In O'Malley, C. (ed.) Computer Supported Collaborative Learning: Heidelberg: Springer-VerlagKokkidou, M. (2013). Critical thinking and school music education: Literature review, research findings, and perspectives. Journal for Learning through the Arts, 9(1), Retrieved from http://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/4dt433j3Koh, D. (2006). Reforms of the Vietnamese education system badly needed. Institute of South East Asian Studies.Kurfiss, J. G. (1988). Critical thinking: Theory, research, and possibilities. ASHE – ERIC Higher education Report No.2, Washington DC.Macduff, Anne (2005) "Deep Learning, Critical Thinking and Teaching for Law Reform," Legal Education Review: Vol. 15 : Iss. 1 ,Article 6.Marshall, R. & Tucker, M. (1992). Thinking for a living. New York: Basic BooksMason, M. (2007). Critical Thinking and Learning. Educational philosophy and theory. Volume 39, Issue 4, Pages 339–349 McCollister, K., & Sayler, M. (2010). Lift the ceiling: Increase rigor with critical thinking skills. Gifted Child Today, 33(1), 41-47.McPeck, J. (1981). Critical Thinking and Education. St. Martin's PressHằng, N. V. T., Meijer, M., Bulte, A. M. W., & Pilot, A. (2015). The implementation of a social constructivist approach in primary science education in Confucian heritage culture: the case of Vietnam. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 10(3), 2015, 665-693.DOI: 10.1007/s11422-014-9634-8Newman, D., Webb, B., & Cochrane, C. (1995). A content analysis method to measure critical thinking in face-to-face and computer supported group learning. Ipct - J, vol 3 (2), pp. 56-77.Nguyen Quang Kinh, Nguyen Quoc Chi (2008). Education in Vietnam: Development history, challenges and solutions. In An African Exploration of the East Asian Education Experience, Edited by Birger Fredriksen and Tan Jee Peng, The World Bank, Washington, D. C. Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2012). The nature and functions of critical & creative thinking. Tomales, CA: Foundation for Critical ThinkingRichmond, J. E. D. (2007). Bringing critical thinking to the education of developing country professionals, International Education Journal, v8 n1 p1-29 Ryan, J. & Louie, K. (2007). False dichotomy?: ‘Western’ and ‘Eastern’ concepts of scholarship and learning. Educational Philosophy and Theory (39)4, 404 - 417.Paul, R., & Scriven, M. (1987). Critical thinking as defined by the National Council for Excellence in Critical Thinking, Statement presented at the 8th Annual International Conference on Critical Thinking and Education Reform , BerkeleyPintrich, P. R., Smith, D., Garcia, T., and McKeachie, W. (1991). A Manual for the Use of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ), The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.Snodgrass, S. (2011). Wiki activities in blended learning for health professional students: Enhancing critical thinking and clinical reasoning skills. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 27(4), 563-580.Tsai, P., Chen, S., Chang, H., & Chang, W. (2013). Effects of prompting critical reading of science news on seventh graders’ cognitive achievement. International Journal of Environmental & Science, 8(1), 85-107. doi: 10.1002/tea. 20385.Tran Thu Ha & Trudy Harpham (2005). Primary education in Vietnam: Extra classes and outcomes. International Education Journal, 6(5), 626-634. Trilling, B. & Fadel, C. (2009). 21th century skills: Learning for life in our time. Jossey-Bass, USA. Watkins, D. & Biggs, J.B. (2001). Teaching the Chinese learner: psychological and pedagogical perspectives. Hong Kong/Melbourne: Comparative Education Research Centre/Australian Council for Educational ResearchWatson G., Glaser E. M. (1980). Watson-Glaser critical thinking appraisal. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation. Wollack, J. A. & Fremer, J. (2013) (Eds). Handbook of test security threat. Taylor & Francis

IntroductionThe Internet (especially in the so-called Web 2.0 phase), digital media and file-sharing networks have thrust copyright law under public scrutiny, provoking discourses questioning what is fair in the digital age. Accessible hardware and software has led to prosumerism – creativity blending media consumption with media production to create new works that are freely disseminated online via popular video-sharing Web sites such as YouTube or genre specific music sites like GYBO (“Get Your Bootleg On”) amongst many others. The term “prosumer” is older than the Web, and the conceptual convergence of producer and consumer roles is certainly not new, for “at electric speeds the consumer becomes producer as the public becomes participant role player” (McLuhan 4). Similarly, Toffler’s “Third Wave” challenges “old power relationships” and promises to “heal the historic breach between producer and consumer, giving rise to the ‘prosumer’ economics” (27). Prosumption blurs the traditionally separate consumer and producer creating a new creative era of mass customisation of artefacts culled from the (copyrighted) media landscape (Tapscott 62-3). Simultaneously, corporate interests dependent upon the protections provided by copyright law lobby for augmented rights and actively defend their intellectual property through law suits, takedown notices and technological reinforcement. Despite a lack demonstrable economic harm in many cases, the propertarian approach is winning and frequently leading to absurd results (Collins).The balance between private and public interests in creative works is facilitated by the doctrine of fair use (as codified in the United States Copyright Act 1976, section 107). The majority of copyright laws contain “fair” exceptions to claims of infringement, but fair use is characterised by a flexible, open-ended approach that allows the law to flex with the times. Until recently the defence was unique to the U.S., but on 2 January Israel amended its copyright laws to include a fair use defence. (For an overview of the new Israeli fair use exception, see Efroni.) Despite its flexibility, fair use has been systematically eroded by ever encroaching copyrights. This paper argues that copyright enforcement has spun out of control and the raison d’être of the law has shifted from being “an engine of free expression” (Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc. v. Nation Enterprises 471 U.S. 539, 558 (1985)) towards a “legal regime for intellectual property that increasingly looks like the law of real property, or more properly an idealized construct of that law, one in which courts seeks out and punish virtually any use of an intellectual property right by another” (Lemley 1032). Although the copyright landscape appears bleak, two recent cases suggest that fair use has not fallen by the wayside and may well recover. This paper situates fair use as an essential legal and cultural mechanism for optimising creative expression.A Brief History of CopyrightThe law of copyright extends back to eighteenth century England when the Statute of Anne (1710) was enacted. Whilst the length of this paper precludes an in depth analysis of the law and its export to the U.S., it is important to stress the goals of copyright. “Copyright in the American tradition was not meant to be a “property right” as the public generally understands property. It was originally a narrow federal policy that granted a limited trade monopoly in exchange for universal use and access” (Vaidhyanathan 11). Copyright was designed as a right limited in scope and duration to ensure that culturally important creative works were not the victims of monopolies and were free (as later mandated in the U.S. Constitution) “to promote the progress.” During the 18th century English copyright discourse Lord Camden warned against propertarian approaches lest “all our learning will be locked up in the hands of the Tonsons and the Lintons of the age, who will set what price upon it their avarice chooses to demand, till the public become as much their slaves, as their own hackney compilers are” (Donaldson v. Becket 17 Cobbett Parliamentary History, col. 1000). Camden’s sentiments found favour in subsequent years with members of the North American judiciary reiterating that copyright was a limited right in the interests of society—the law’s primary beneficiary (see for example, Wheaton v. Peters 33 US 591 [1834]; Fox Film Corporation v. Doyal 286 US 123 [1932]; US v. Paramount Pictures 334 US 131 [1948]; Mazer v. Stein 347 US 201, 219 [1954]; Twentieth Century Music Corp. v. Aitken 422 U.S. 151 [1975]; Aronson v. Quick Point Pencil Co. 440 US 257 [1979]; Dowling v. United States 473 US 207 [1985]; Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc. v. Nation Enterprises 471 U.S. 539 [1985]; Luther R. Campbell a.k.a. Luke Skyywalker, et al. v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc. 510 U.S 569 [1994]). Putting the “Fair” in Fair UseIn Folsom v. Marsh 9 F. Cas. 342 (C.C.D. Mass. 1841) (No. 4,901) Justice Storey formulated the modern shape of fair use from a wealth of case law extending back to 1740 and across the Atlantic. Over the course of one hundred years the English judiciary developed a relatively cohesive set of principles governing the use of a first author’s work by a subsequent author without consent. Storey’s synthesis of these principles proved so comprehensive that later English courts would look to his decision for guidance (Scott v. Stanford L.R. 3 Eq. 718, 722 (1867)). Patry explains fair use as integral to the social utility of copyright to “encourage. . . learned men to compose and write useful books” by allowing a second author to use, under certain circumstances, a portion of a prior author’s work, where the second author would himself produce a work promoting the goals of copyright (Patry 4-5).Fair use is a safety valve on copyright law to prevent oppressive monopolies, but some scholars suggest that fair use is less a defence and more a right that subordinates copyrights. Lange and Lange Anderson argue that the doctrine is not fundamentally about copyright or a system of property, but is rather concerned with the recognition of the public domain and its preservation from the ever encroaching advances of copyright (2001). Fair use should not be understood as subordinate to the exclusive rights of copyright owners. Rather, as Lange and Lange Anderson claim, the doctrine should stand in the superior position: the complete spectrum of ownership through copyright can only be determined pursuant to a consideration of what is required by fair use (Lange and Lange Anderson 19). The language of section 107 suggests that fair use is not subordinate to the bundle of rights enjoyed by copyright ownership: “Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work . . . is not an infringement of copyright” (Copyright Act 1976, s.107). Fair use is not merely about the marketplace for copyright works; it is concerned with what Weinreb refers to as “a community’s established practices and understandings” (1151-2). This argument boldly suggests that judicial application of fair use has consistently erred through subordinating the doctrine to copyright and considering simply the effect of the appropriation on the market place for the original work.The emphasis on economic factors has led courts to sympathise with copyright owners leading to a propertarian or Blackstonian approach to copyright (Collins; Travis) propagating the myth that any use of copyrighted materials must be licensed. Law and media reports alike are potted with examples. For example, in Bridgeport Music, Inc., et al v. Dimension Films et al 383 F. 3d 400 (6th Cir. 2004) a Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals held that the transformative use of a three-note guitar sample infringed copyrights and that musicians must obtain licence from copyright owners for every appropriated audio fragment regardless of duration or recognisability. Similarly, in 2006 Christopher Knight self-produced a one-minute television advertisement to support his campaign to be elected to the board of education for Rockingham County, North Carolina. As a fan of Star Wars, Knight used a makeshift Death Star and lightsaber in his clip, capitalising on the imagery of the Jedi Knight opposing the oppressive regime of the Empire to protect the people. According to an interview in The Register the advertisement was well received by local audiences prompting Knight to upload it to his YouTube channel. Several months later, Knight’s clip appeared on Web Junk 2.0, a cable show broadcast by VH1, a channel owned by media conglomerate Viacom. Although his permission was not sought, Knight was pleased with the exposure, after all “how often does a local school board ad wind up on VH1?” (Metz). Uploading the segment of Web Junk 2.0 featuring the advertisement to YouTube, however, led Viacom to quickly issue a take-down notice citing copyright infringement. Knight expressed his confusion at the apparent unfairness of the situation: “Viacom says that I can’t use my clip showing my commercial, claiming copy infringement? As we say in the South, that’s ass-backwards” (Metz).The current state of copyright law is, as Patry says, “depressing”:We are well past the healthy dose stage and into the serious illness stage ... things are getting worse, not better. Copyright law has abandoned its reason for being: to encourage learning and the creation of new works. Instead, its principal functions now are to preserve existing failed business models, to suppress new business models and technologies, and to obtain, if possible, enormous windfall profits from activity that not only causes no harm, but which is beneficial to copyright owners. Like Humpty-Dumpty, the copyright law we used to know can never be put back together.The erosion of fair use by encroaching private interests represented by copyrights has led to strong critiques leveled at the judiciary and legislators by Lessig, McLeod and Vaidhyanathan. “Free culture” proponents warn that an overly strict copyright regime unbalanced by an equally prevalent fair use doctrine is dangerous to creativity, innovation, culture and democracy. After all, “few, if any, things ... are strictly original throughout. Every book in literature, science and art, borrows, and must necessarily borrow, and use much which was well known and used before. No man creates a new language for himself, at least if he be a wise man, in writing a book. He contents himself with the use of language already known and used and understood by others” (Emerson v. Davis, 8 F. Cas. 615, 619 (No. 4,436) (CCD Mass. 1845), qted in Campbell v. Acuff-Rose, 62 U.S.L.W. at 4171 (1994)). The rise of the Web 2.0 phase with its emphasis on end-user created content has led to an unrelenting wave of creativity, and much of it incorporates or “mashes up” copyright material. As Negativland observes, free appropriation is “inevitable when a population bombarded with electronic media meets the hardware [and software] that encourages them to capture it” and creatively express themselves through appropriated media forms (251). The current state of copyright and fair use is bleak, but not beyond recovery. Two recent cases suggest a resurgence of the ideology underpinning the doctrine of fair use and the role played by copyright.Let’s Go CrazyIn “Let’s Go Crazy #1” on YouTube, Holden Lenz (then eighteen months old) is caught bopping to a barely recognizable recording of Prince’s “Let’s Go Crazy” in his mother’s Pennsylvanian kitchen. The twenty-nine second long video was viewed a mere twenty-eight times by family and friends before Stephanie Lenz received an email from YouTube informing her of its compliance with a Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) take-down notice issued by Universal, copyright owners of Prince’s recording (McDonald). Lenz has since filed a counterclaim against Universal and YouTube has reinstated the video. Ironically, the media exposure surrounding Lenz’s situation has led to the video being viewed 633,560 times at the time of writing. Comments associated with the video indicate a less than reverential opinion of Prince and Universal and support the fairness of using the song. On 8 Aug. 2008 a Californian District Court denied Universal’s motion to dismiss Lenz’s counterclaim. The question at the centre of the court judgment was whether copyright owners should consider “the fair use doctrine in formulating a good faith belief that use of the material in the manner complained of is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law.” The court ultimately found in favour of Lenz and also reaffirmed the position of fair use in relation to copyright. Universal rested its argument on two key points. First, that copyright owners cannot be expected to consider fair use prior to issuing takedown notices because fair use is a defence, invoked after the act rather than a use authorized by the copyright owner or the law. Second, because the DMCA does not mention fair use, then there should be no requirement to consider it, or at the very least, it should not be considered until it is raised in legal defence.In rejecting both arguments the court accepted Lenz’s argument that fair use is an authorised use of copyrighted materials because the doctrine of fair use is embedded into the Copyright Act 1976. The court substantiated the point by emphasising the language of section 107. Although fair use is absent from the DMCA, the court reiterated that it is part of the Copyright Act and that “notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A” a fair use “is not an infringement of copyright” (s.107, Copyright Act 1976). Overzealous rights holders frequently abuse the DMCA as a means to quash all use of copyrighted materials without considering fair use. This decision reaffirms that fair use “should not be considered a bizarre, occasionally tolerated departure from the grand conception of the copyright design” but something that it is integral to the constitution of copyright law and essential in ensuring that copyright’s goals can be fulfilled (Leval 1100). Unlicensed musical sampling has never fared well in the courtroom. Three decades of rejection and admonishment by judges culminated in Bridgeport Music, Inc., et al v. Dimension Films et al 383 F. 3d 400 (6th Cir. 2004): “Get a license or do not sample. We do not see this stifling creativity in any significant way” was the ruling on an action brought against an unlicensed use of a three-note guitar sample under section 114, an audio piracy provision. The Bridgeport decision sounded a death knell for unlicensed sampling, ensuring that only artists with sufficient capital to pay the piper could legitimately be creative with the wealth of recorded music available. The cost of licensing samples can often outweigh the creative merit of the act itself as discussed by McLeod (86) and Beaujon (25). In August 2008 the Supreme Court of New York heard EMI v. Premise Media in which EMI sought an injunction against an unlicensed fifteen second excerpt of John Lennon’s “Imagine” featured in Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed, a controversial documentary canvassing alleged chilling of intelligent design proponents in academic circles. (The family of John Lennon and EMI had previously failed to persuade a Manhattan federal court in a similar action.) The court upheld Premise Media’s arguments for fair use and rejected the Bridgeport approach on which EMI had rested its entire complaint. Justice Lowe criticised the Bridgeport court for its failure to examine the legislative intent of section 114 suggesting that courts should look to the black letter of the law rather than blindly accept propertarian arguments. This decision is of particular importance because it establishes that fair use applies to unlicensed use of sound recordings and re-establishes de minimis use.ConclusionThis paper was partly inspired by the final entry on eminent copyright scholar William Patry’s personal copyright law blog (1 Aug. 2008). A copyright lawyer for over 25 years, Patry articulated his belief that copyright law has swung too far away from its initial objectives and that balance could never be restored. The two cases presented in this paper demonstrate that fair use – and therefore balance – can be recovered in copyright. The federal Supreme Court and lower courts have stressed that copyright was intended to promote creativity and have upheld the fair doctrine, but in order for the balance to exist in copyright law, cases must come before the courts; copyright myth must be challenged. As McLeod states, “the real-world problems occur when institutions that actually have the resources to defend themselves against unwarranted or frivolous lawsuits choose to take the safe route, thus eroding fair use”(146-7). ReferencesBeaujon, Andrew. “It’s Not the Beat, It’s the Mocean.” CMJ New Music Monthly. April 1999.Collins, Steve. “Good Copy, Bad Copy: Covers, Sampling and Copyright.” M/C Journal 8.3 (2005). 26 Aug. 2008 ‹http://journal.media-culture.org.au/0507/02-collins.php›.———. “‘Property Talk’ and the Revival of Blackstonian Copyright.” M/C Journal 9.4 (2006). 26 Aug. 2008 ‹http://journal.media-culture.org.au/0609/5-collins.php›.Donaldson v. Becket 17 Cobbett Parliamentary History, col. 953.Efroni, Zohar. “Israel’s Fair Use.” The Center for Internet and Society (2008). 26 Aug. 2008 ‹http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/node/5670›.Lange, David, and Jennifer Lange Anderson. “Copyright, Fair Use and Transformative Critical Appropriation.” Conference on the Public Domain, Duke Law School. 2001. 26 Aug. 2008 ‹http://www.law.duke.edu/pd/papers/langeand.pdf›.Lemley, Mark. “Property, Intellectual Property, and Free Riding.” Texas Law Review 83 (2005): 1031.Lessig, Lawrence. The Future of Ideas. New York: Random House, 2001.———. Free Culture. New York: Penguin, 2004.Leval, Pierre. “Toward a Fair Use Standard.” Harvard Law Review 103 (1990): 1105.McDonald, Heather. “Holden Lenz, 18 Months, versus Prince and Universal Music Group.” About.com: Music Careers 2007. 26 Aug. 2008 ‹http://musicians.about.com/b/2007/10/27/holden-lenz-18-months-versus-prince-and-universal-music-group.htm›.McLeod, Kembrew. “How Copyright Law Changed Hip Hop: An interview with Public Enemy’s Chuck D and Hank Shocklee.” Stay Free 2002. 26 Aug. 2008 ‹http://www.stayfreemagazine.org/archives/20/public_enemy.html›.———. Freedom of Expression: Overzealous Copyright Bozos and Other Enemies of Creativity. United States: Doubleday, 2005.McLuhan, Marshall, and Barrington Nevitt. Take Today: The Executive as Dropout. Ontario: Longman Canada, 1972.Metz, Cade. “Viacom Slaps YouTuber for Behaving like Viacom.” The Register 2007. 26 Aug. 2008 ‹http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/08/30/viacom_slaps_pol/›.Negativland, ed. Fair Use: The Story of the Letter U and the Numeral 2. Concord: Seeland, 1995.Patry, William. The Fair Use Privilege in Copyright Law. Washington DC: Bureau of National Affairs, 1985.———. “End of the Blog.” The Patry Copyright Blog. 1 Aug. 2008. 27 Aug. 2008 ‹http://williampatry.blogspot.com/2008/08/end-of-blog.html›.Tapscott, Don. The Digital Economy: Promise and Peril in the Age of Networked Intelligence. New York: McGraw Hill, 1996.Toffler, Alvin. The Third Wave. London, Glasgow, Sydney, Auckland. Toronto, Johannesburg: William Collins, 1980.Travis, Hannibal. “Pirates of the Information Infrastructure: Blackstonian Copyright and the First Amendment.” Berkeley Technology Law Journal, Vol. 15 (2000), No. 777.Vaidhyanathan, Siva. Copyrights and Copywrongs: The Rise of Intellectual Property and How It Threatens Creativity. New York; London: New York UP, 2003.

Introduction: Our current obsession with the lives of others “Biography—that is to say, our creative and non-fictional output devoted to recording and interpreting real lives—has enjoyed an extraordinary renaissance in recent years,” writes Nigel Hamilton in Biography: A Brief History (1). Ian Donaldson agrees that biography is back in fashion: “Once neglected within the academy and relegated to the dustier recesses of public bookstores, biography has made a notable return over recent years, emerging, somewhat surprisingly, as a new cultural phenomenon, and a new academic adventure” (23). For over a decade now, commentators having been making similar observations about our obsession with the intimacies of individual people’s lives. In a lecture in 1994, Justin Kaplan asserted the West was “a culture of biography” (qtd. in Salwak 1) and more recent research findings by John Feather and Hazel Woodbridge affirm that “the undiminished human curiosity about other peoples lives is clearly reflected in the popularity of autobiographies and biographies” (218). At least in relation to television, this assertion seems valid. In Australia, as in the USA and the UK, reality and other biographically based television shows have taken over from drama in both the numbers of shows produced and the viewers these shows attract, and these forms are also popular in Canada (see, for instance, Morreale on The Osbournes). In 2007, the program Biography celebrated its twentieth anniversary season to become one of the longest running documentary series on American television; so successful that in 1999 it was spun off into its own eponymous channel (Rak; Dempsey). Premiered in May 1996, Australian Story—which aims to utilise a “personal approach” to biographical storytelling—has won a significant viewership, critical acclaim and professional recognition (ABC). It can also be posited that the real home movies viewers submit to such programs as Australia’s Favourite Home Videos, and “chat” or “confessional” television are further reflections of a general mania for biographical detail (see Douglas), no matter how fragmented, sensationalized, or even inane and cruel. A recent example of the latter, the USA-produced The Moment of Truth, has contestants answering personal questions under polygraph examination and then again in front of an audience including close relatives and friends—the more “truthful” their answers (and often, the more humiliated and/or distressed contestants are willing to be), the more money they can win. Away from television, but offering further evidence of this interest are the growing readerships for personally oriented weblogs and networking sites such as MySpace and Facebook (Grossman), individual profiles and interviews in periodical publications, and the recently widely revived newspaper obituary column (Starck). Adult and community education organisations run short courses on researching and writing auto/biographical forms and, across Western countries, the family history/genealogy sections of many local, state, and national libraries have been upgraded to meet the increasing demand for these services. Academically, journals and e-mail discussion lists have been established on the topics of biography and autobiography, and North American, British, and Australian universities offer undergraduate and postgraduate courses in life writing. The commonly aired wisdom is that published life writing in its many text-based forms (biography, autobiography, memoir, diaries, and collections of personal letters) is enjoying unprecedented popularity. It is our purpose to examine this proposition. Methodological problems There are a number of problems involved in investigating genre popularity, growth, and decline in publishing. Firstly, it is not easy to gain access to detailed statistics, which are usually only available within the industry. Secondly, it is difficult to ascertain how publishing statistics are gathered and what they report (Eliot). There is the question of whether bestselling booklists reflect actual book sales or are manipulated marketing tools (Miller), although the move from surveys of booksellers to electronic reporting at point of sale in new publishing lists such as BookScan will hopefully obviate this problem. Thirdly, some publishing lists categorise by subject and form, some by subject only, and some do not categorise at all. This means that in any analysis of these statistics, a decision has to be made whether to use the publishing list’s system or impose a different mode. If the publishing list is taken at face value, the question arises of whether to use categorisation by form or by subject. Fourthly, there is the bedeviling issue of terminology. Traditionally, there reigned a simple dualism in the terminology applied to forms of telling the true story of an actual life: biography and autobiography. Publishing lists that categorise their books, such as BookScan, have retained it. But with postmodern recognition of the presence of the biographer in a biography and of the presence of other subjects in an autobiography, the dichotomy proves false. There is the further problem of how to categorise memoirs, diaries, and letters. In the academic arena, the term “life writing” has emerged to describe the field as a whole. Within the genre of life writing, there are, however, still recognised sub-genres. Academic definitions vary, but generally a biography is understood to be a scholarly study of a subject who is not the writer; an autobiography is the story of a entire life written by its subject; while a memoir is a segment or particular focus of that life told, again, by its own subject. These terms are, however, often used interchangeably even by significant institutions such the USA Library of Congress, which utilises the term “biography” for all. Different commentators also use differing definitions. Hamilton uses the term “biography” to include all forms of life writing. Donaldson discusses how the term has been co-opted to include biographies of place such as Peter Ackroyd’s London: The Biography (2000) and of things such as Lizzie Collingham’s Curry: A Biography (2005). This reflects, of course, a writing/publishing world in which non-fiction stories of places, creatures, and even foodstuffs are called biographies, presumably in the belief that this will make them more saleable. The situation is further complicated by the emergence of hybrid publishing forms such as, for instance, the “memoir-with-recipes” or “food memoir” (Brien, Rutherford and Williamson). Are such books to be classified as autobiography or put in the “cookery/food & drink” category? We mention in passing the further confusion caused by novels with a subtitle of The Biography such as Virginia Woolf’s Orlando. The fifth methodological problem that needs to be mentioned is the increasing globalisation of the publishing industry, which raises questions about the validity of the majority of studies available (including those cited herein) which are nationally based. Whether book sales reflect what is actually read (and by whom), raises of course another set of questions altogether. Methodology In our exploration, we were fundamentally concerned with two questions. Is life writing as popular as claimed? And, if it is, is this a new phenomenon? To answer these questions, we examined a range of available sources. We began with the non-fiction bestseller lists in Publishers Weekly (a respected American trade magazine aimed at publishers, librarians, booksellers, and literary agents that claims to be international in scope) from their inception in 1912 to the present time. We hoped that this data could provide a longitudinal perspective. The term bestseller was coined by Publishers Weekly when it began publishing its lists in 1912; although the first list of popular American books actually appeared in The Bookman (New York) in 1895, based itself on lists appearing in London’s The Bookman since 1891 (Bassett and Walter 206). The Publishers Weekly lists are the best source of longitudinal information as the currently widely cited New York Times listings did not appear till 1942, with the Wall Street Journal a late entry into the field in 1994. We then examined a number of sources of more recent statistics. We looked at the bestseller lists from the USA-based Amazon.com online bookseller; recent research on bestsellers in Britain; and lists from Nielsen BookScan Australia, which claims to tally some 85% or more of books sold in Australia, wherever they are published. In addition to the reservations expressed above, caveats must be aired in relation to these sources. While Publishers Weekly claims to be an international publication, it largely reflects the North American publishing scene and especially that of the USA. Although available internationally, Amazon.com also has its own national sites—such as Amazon.co.uk—not considered here. It also caters to a “specific computer-literate, credit-able clientele” (Gutjahr: 219) and has an unashamedly commercial focus, within which all the information generated must be considered. In our analysis of the material studied, we will use “life writing” as a genre term. When it comes to analysis of the lists, we have broken down the genre of life writing into biography and autobiography, incorporating memoir, letters, and diaries under autobiography. This is consistent with the use of the terminology in BookScan. Although we have broken down the genre in this way, it is the overall picture with regard to life writing that is our concern. It is beyond the scope of this paper to offer a detailed analysis of whether, within life writing, further distinctions should be drawn. Publishers Weekly: 1912 to 2006 1912 saw the first list of the 10 bestselling non-fiction titles in Publishers Weekly. It featured two life writing texts, being headed by an autobiography, The Promised Land by Russian Jewish immigrant Mary Antin, and concluding with Albert Bigelow Paine’s six-volume biography, Mark Twain. The Publishers Weekly lists do not categorise non-fiction titles by either form or subject, so the classifications below are our own with memoir classified as autobiography. In a decade-by-decade tally of these listings, there were 3 biographies and 20 autobiographies in the lists between 1912 and 1919; 24 biographies and 21 autobiographies in the 1920s; 13 biographies and 40 autobiographies in the 1930s; 8 biographies and 46 biographies in the 1940s; 4 biographies and 14 autobiographies in the 1950s; 11 biographies and 13 autobiographies in the 1960s; 6 biographies and 11 autobiographies in the 1970s; 3 biographies and 19 autobiographies in the 1980s; 5 biographies and 17 autobiographies in the 1990s; and 2 biographies and 7 autobiographies from 2000 up until the end of 2006. See Appendix 1 for the relevant titles and authors. Breaking down the most recent figures for 1990–2006, we find a not radically different range of figures and trends across years in the contemporary environment. The validity of looking only at the top ten books sold in any year is, of course, questionable, as are all the issues regarding sources discussed above. But one thing is certain in terms of our inquiry. There is no upwards curve obvious here. If anything, the decade break-down suggests that sales are trending downwards. This is in keeping with the findings of Michael Korda, in his history of twentieth-century bestsellers. He suggests a consistent longitudinal picture across all genres: In every decade, from 1900 to the end of the twentieth century, people have been reliably attracted to the same kind of books […] Certain kinds of popular fiction always do well, as do diet books […] self-help books, celebrity memoirs, sensationalist scientific or religious speculation, stories about pets, medical advice (particularly on the subjects of sex, longevity, and child rearing), folksy wisdom and/or humour, and the American Civil War (xvii). Amazon.com since 2000 The USA-based Amazon.com online bookselling site provides listings of its own top 50 bestsellers since 2000, although only the top 14 bestsellers are recorded for 2001. As fiction and non-fiction are not separated out on these lists and no genre categories are specified, we have again made our own decisions about what books fall into the category of life writing. Generally, we erred on the side of inclusion. (See Appendix 2.) However, when it came to books dealing with political events, we excluded books dealing with specific aspects of political practice/policy. This meant excluding books on, for instance, George Bush’s so-called ‘war on terror,’ of which there were a number of bestsellers listed. In summary, these listings reveal that of the top 364 books sold by Amazon from 2000 to 2007, 46 (or some 12.6%) were, according to our judgment, either biographical or autobiographical texts. This is not far from the 10% of the 1912 Publishers Weekly listing, although, as above, the proportion of bestsellers that can be classified as life writing varied dramatically from year to year, with no discernible pattern of peaks and troughs. This proportion tallied to 4% auto/biographies in 2000, 14% in 2001, 10% in 2002, 18% in 2003 and 2004, 4% in 2005, 14% in 2006 and 20% in 2007. This could suggest a rising trend, although it does not offer any consistent trend data to suggest sales figures may either continue to grow, or fall again, in 2008 or afterwards. Looking at the particular texts in these lists (see Appendix 2) also suggests that there is no general trend in the popularity of life writing in relation to other genres. For instance, in these listings in Amazon.com, life writing texts only rarely figure in the top 10 books sold in any year. So rarely indeed, that from 2001 there were only five in this category. In 2001, John Adams by David McCullough was the best selling book of the year; in 2003, Hillary Clinton’s autobiographical Living History was 7th; in 2004, My Life by Bill Clinton reached number 1; in 2006, Nora Ephron’s I Feel Bad About My Neck: and Other Thoughts on Being a Woman was 9th; and in 2007, Ishmael Beah’s discredited A Long Way Gone: Memoirs of a Boy Soldier came in at 8th. Apart from McCulloch’s biography of Adams, all the above are autobiographical texts, while the focus on leading political figures is notable. Britain: Feather and Woodbridge With regard to the British situation, we did not have actual lists and relied on recent analysis. John Feather and Hazel Woodbridge find considerably higher levels for life writing in Britain than above with, from 1998 to 2005, 28% of British published non-fiction comprising autobiography, while 8% of hardback and 5% of paperback non-fiction was biography (2007). Furthermore, although Feather and Woodbridge agree with commentators that life writing is currently popular, they do not agree that this is a growth state, finding the popularity of life writing “essentially unchanged” since their previous study, which covered 1979 to the early 1990s (Feather and Reid). Australia: Nielsen BookScan 2006 and 2007 In the Australian publishing industry, where producing books remains an ‘expensive, risky endeavour which is increasingly market driven’ (Galligan 36) and ‘an inherently complex activity’ (Carter and Galligan 4), the most recent Australian Bureau of Statistics figures reveal that the total numbers of books sold in Australia has remained relatively static over the past decade (130.6 million in the financial year 1995–96 and 128.8 million in 2003–04) (ABS). During this time, however, sales volumes of non-fiction publications have grown markedly, with a trend towards “non-fiction, mass market and predictable” books (Corporall 41) resulting in general non-fiction sales in 2003–2004 outselling general fiction by factors as high as ten depending on the format—hard- or paperback, and trade or mass market paperback (ABS 2005). However, while non-fiction has increased in popularity in Australia, the same does not seem to hold true for life writing. Here, in utilising data for the top 5,000 selling non-fiction books in both 2006 and 2007, we are relying on Nielsen BookScan’s categorisation of texts as either biography or autobiography. In 2006, no works of life writing made the top 10 books sold in Australia. In looking at the top 100 books sold for 2006, in some cases the subjects of these works vary markedly from those extracted from the Amazon.com listings. In Australia in 2006, life writing makes its first appearance at number 14 with convicted drug smuggler Schapelle Corby’s My Story. This is followed by another My Story at 25, this time by retired Australian army chief, Peter Cosgrove. Jonestown: The Power and Myth of Alan Jones comes in at 34 for the Australian broadcaster’s biographer Chris Masters; the biography, The Innocent Man by John Grisham at 38 and Li Cunxin’s autobiographical Mao’s Last Dancer at 45. Australian Susan Duncan’s memoir of coping with personal loss, Salvation Creek: An Unexpected Life makes 50; bestselling USA travel writer Bill Bryson’s autobiographical memoir of his childhood The Life and Times of the Thunderbolt Kid 69; Mandela: The Authorised Portrait by Rosalind Coward, 79; and Joanne Lees’s memoir of dealing with her kidnapping, the murder of her partner and the justice system in Australia’s Northern Territory, No Turning Back, 89. These books reveal a market preference for autobiographical writing, and an almost even split between Australian and overseas subjects in 2006. 2007 similarly saw no life writing in the top 10. The books in the top 100 sales reveal a downward trend, with fewer titles making this band overall. In 2007, Terri Irwin’s memoir of life with her famous husband, wildlife warrior Steve Irwin, My Steve, came in at number 26; musician Andrew Johns’s memoir of mental illness, The Two of Me, at 37; Ayaan Hirst Ali’s autobiography Infidel at 39; John Grogan’s biography/memoir, Marley and Me: Life and Love with the World’s Worst Dog, at 42; Sally Collings’s biography of the inspirational young survivor Sophie Delezio, Sophie’s Journey, at 51; and Elizabeth Gilbert’s hybrid food, self-help and travel memoir, Eat, Pray, Love: One Woman’s Search for Everything at 82. Mao’s Last Dancer, published the year before, remained in the top 100 in 2007 at 87. When moving to a consideration of the top 5,000 books sold in Australia in 2006, BookScan reveals only 62 books categorised as life writing in the top 1,000, and only 222 in the top 5,000 (with 34 titles between 1,000 and 1,999, 45 between 2,000 and 2,999, 48 between 3,000 and 3,999, and 33 between 4,000 and 5,000). 2007 shows a similar total of 235 life writing texts in the top 5,000 bestselling books (75 titles in the first 1,000, 27 between 1,000 and 1,999, 51 between 2,000 and 2,999, 39 between 3,000 and 3,999, and 43 between 4,000 and 5,000). In both years, 2006 and 2007, life writing thus not only constituted only some 4% of the bestselling 5,000 titles in Australia, it also showed only minimal change between these years and, therefore, no significant growth. Conclusions Our investigation using various instruments that claim to reflect levels of book sales reveals that Western readers’ willingness to purchase published life writing has not changed significantly over the past century. We find no evidence of either a short, or longer, term growth or boom in sales in such books. Instead, it appears that what has been widely heralded as a new golden age of life writing may well be more the result of an expanded understanding of what is included in the genre than an increased interest in it by either book readers or publishers. What recent years do appear to have seen, however, is a significantly increased interest by public commentators, critics, and academics in this genre of writing. We have also discovered that the issue of our current obsession with the lives of others tends to be discussed in academic as well as popular fora as if what applies to one sub-genre or production form applies to another: if biography is popular, then autobiography will also be, and vice versa. If reality television programming is attracting viewers, then readers will be flocking to life writing as well. Our investigation reveals that such propositions are questionable, and that there is significant research to be completed in mapping such audiences against each other. This work has also highlighted the difficulty of separating out the categories of written texts in publishing studies, firstly in terms of determining what falls within the category of life writing as distinct from other forms of non-fiction (the hybrid problem) and, secondly, in terms of separating out the categories within life writing. Although we have continued to use the terms biography and autobiography as sub-genres, we are aware that they are less useful as descriptors than they are often assumed to be. In order to obtain a more complete and accurate picture, publishing categories may need to be agreed upon, redefined and utilised across the publishing industry and within academia. This is of particular importance in the light of the suggestions (from total sales volumes) that the audiences for books are limited, and therefore the rise of one sub-genre may be directly responsible for the fall of another. Bair argues, for example, that in the 1980s and 1990s, the popularity of what she categorises as memoir had direct repercussions on the numbers of birth-to-death biographies that were commissioned, contracted, and published as “sales and marketing staffs conclude[d] that readers don’t want a full-scale life any more” (17). Finally, although we have highlighted the difficulty of using publishing statistics when there is no common understanding as to what such data is reporting, we hope this study shows that the utilisation of such material does add a depth to such enquiries, especially in interrogating the anecdotal evidence that is often quoted as data in publishing and other studies. Appendix 1 Publishers Weekly listings 1990–1999 1990 included two autobiographies, Bo Knows Bo by professional athlete Bo Jackson (with Dick Schaap) and Ronald Reagan’s An America Life: An Autobiography. In 1991, there were further examples of life writing with unimaginative titles, Me: Stories of My Life by Katherine Hepburn, Nancy Reagan: The Unauthorized Biography by Kitty Kelley, and Under Fire: An American Story by Oliver North with William Novak; as indeed there were again in 1992 with It Doesn’t Take a Hero: The Autobiography of Norman Schwarzkopf, Sam Walton: Made in America, the autobiography of the founder of Wal-Mart, Diana: Her True Story by Andrew Morton, Every Living Thing, yet another veterinary outpouring from James Herriot, and Truman by David McCullough. In 1993, radio shock-jock Howard Stern was successful with the autobiographical Private Parts, as was Betty Eadie with her detailed recounting of her alleged near-death experience, Embraced by the Light. Eadie’s book remained on the list in 1994 next to Don’t Stand too Close to a Naked Man, comedian Tim Allen’s autobiography. Flag-waving titles continue in 1995 with Colin Powell’s My American Journey, and Miss America, Howard Stern’s follow-up to Private Parts. 1996 saw two autobiographical works, basketball superstar Dennis Rodman’s Bad as I Wanna Be and figure-skater, Ekaterina Gordeeva’s (with EM Swift) My Sergei: A Love Story. In 1997, Diana: Her True Story returns to the top 10, joining Frank McCourt’s Angela’s Ashes and prolific biographer Kitty Kelly’s The Royals, while in 1998, there is only the part-autobiography, part travel-writing A Pirate Looks at Fifty, by musician Jimmy Buffet. There is no biography or autobiography included in either the 1999 or 2000 top 10 lists in Publishers Weekly, nor in that for 2005. In 2001, David McCullough’s biography John Adams and Jack Welch’s business memoir Jack: Straight from the Gut featured. In 2002, Let’s Roll! Lisa Beamer’s tribute to her husband, one of the heroes of 9/11, written with Ken Abraham, joined Rudolph Giuliani’s autobiography, Leadership. 2003 saw Hillary Clinton’s autobiography Living History and Paul Burrell’s memoir of his time as Princess Diana’s butler, A Royal Duty, on the list. In 2004, it was Bill Clinton’s turn with My Life. In 2006, we find John Grisham’s true crime (arguably a biography), The Innocent Man, at the top, Grogan’s Marley and Me at number three, and the autobiographical The Audacity of Hope by Barack Obama in fourth place. Appendix 2 Amazon.com listings since 2000 In 2000, there were only two auto/biographies in the top Amazon 50 bestsellers with Lance Armstrong’s It’s Not about the Bike: My Journey Back to Life about his battle with cancer at 20, and Dave Eggers’s self-consciously fictionalised memoir, A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius at 32. In 2001, only the top 14 bestsellers were recorded. At number 1 is John Adams by David McCullough and, at 11, Jack: Straight from the Gut by USA golfer Jack Welch. In 2002, Leadership by Rudolph Giuliani was at 12; Master of the Senate: The Years of Lyndon Johnson by Robert Caro at 29; Portrait of a Killer: Jack the Ripper by Patricia Cornwell at 42; Blinded by the Right: The Conscience of an Ex-Conservative by David Brock at 48; and Louis Gerstner’s autobiographical Who Says Elephants Can’t Dance: Inside IBM’s Historic Turnaround at 50. In 2003, Living History by Hillary Clinton was 7th; Benjamin Franklin: An American Life by Walter Isaacson 14th; Dereliction of Duty: The Eyewitness Account of How President Bill Clinton Endangered America’s Long-Term National Security by Robert Patterson 20th; Under the Banner of Heaven: A Story of Violent Faith by Jon Krakauer 32nd; Leap of Faith: Memoirs of an Unexpected Life by Queen Noor of Jordan 33rd; Kate Remembered, Scott Berg’s biography of Katharine Hepburn, 37th; Who’s your Caddy?: Looping for the Great, Near Great and Reprobates of Golf by Rick Reilly 39th; The Teammates: A Portrait of a Friendship about a winning baseball team by David Halberstam 42nd; and Every Second Counts by Lance Armstrong 49th. In 2004, My Life by Bill Clinton was the best selling book of the year; American Soldier by General Tommy Franks was 16th; Kevin Phillips’s American Dynasty: Aristocracy, Fortune and the Politics of Deceit in the House of Bush 18th; Timothy Russert’s Big Russ and Me: Father and Son. Lessons of Life 20th; Tony Hendra’s Father Joe: The Man who Saved my Soul 23rd; Ron Chernow’s Alexander Hamilton 27th; Cokie Roberts’s Founding Mothers: The Women Who Raised our Nation 31st; Kitty Kelley’s The Family: The Real Story of the Bush Dynasty 42nd; and Chronicles, Volume 1 by Bob Dylan was 43rd. In 2005, auto/biographical texts were well down the list with only The Year of Magical Thinking by Joan Didion at 45 and The Glass Castle: A Memoir by Jeanette Walls at 49. In 2006, there was a resurgence of life writing with Nora Ephron’s I Feel Bad About My Neck: and Other Thoughts on Being a Woman at 9; Grisham’s The Innocent Man at 12; Bill Buford’s food memoir Heat: an Amateur’s Adventures as Kitchen Slave, Line Cook, Pasta-Maker, and Apprentice to a Dante-Quoting Butcher in Tuscany at 23; more food writing with Julia Child’s My Life in France at 29; Immaculée Ilibagiza’s Left to Tell: Discovering God amidst the Rwandan Holocaust at 30; CNN anchor Anderson Cooper’s Dispatches from the Edge: A Memoir of War, Disasters and Survival at 43; and Isabella Hatkoff’s Owen & Mzee: The True Story of a Remarkable Friendship (between a baby hippo and a giant tortoise) at 44. In 2007, Ishmael Beah’s discredited A Long Way Gone: Memoirs of a Boy Soldier came in at 8; Walter Isaacson’s Einstein: His Life and Universe 13; Ayaan Hirst Ali’s autobiography of her life in Muslim society, Infidel, 18; The Reagan Diaries 25; Jesus of Nazareth by Pope Benedict XVI 29; Mother Teresa: Come be my Light 36; Clapton: The Autobiography 40; Tina Brown’s The Diana Chronicles 45; Tony Dungy’s Quiet Strength: The Principles, Practices & Priorities of a Winning Life 47; and Daniel Tammet’s Born on a Blue Day: Inside the Extraordinary Mind of an Autistic Savant at 49. Acknowledgements A sincere thank you to Michael Webster at RMIT for assistance with access to Nielsen BookScan statistics, and to the reviewers of this article for their insightful comments. Any errors are, of course, our own. References Australian Broadcasting Commission (ABC). “About Us.” Australian Story 2008. 1 June 2008. ‹http://www.abc.net.au/austory/aboutus.htm>. Australian Bureau of Statistics. “1363.0 Book Publishers, Australia, 2003–04.” 2005. 1 June 2008 ‹http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/1363.0>. Bair, Deirdre “Too Much S & M.” Sydney Morning Herald 10–11 Sept. 2005: 17. Basset, Troy J., and Christina M. Walter. “Booksellers and Bestsellers: British Book Sales as Documented by The Bookman, 1891–1906.” Book History 4 (2001): 205–36. Brien, Donna Lee, Leonie Rutherford, and Rosemary Williamson. “Hearth and Hotmail: The Domestic Sphere as Commodity and Community in Cyberspace.” M/C Journal 10.4 (2007). 1 June 2008 ‹http://journal.media-culture.org.au/0708/10-brien.php>. Carter, David, and Anne Galligan. “Introduction.” Making Books: Contemporary Australian Publishing. St Lucia: U of Queensland P, 2007. 1–14. Corporall, Glenda. Project Octopus: Report Commissioned by the Australian Society of Authors. Sydney: Australian Society of Authors, 1990. Dempsey, John “Biography Rewrite: A&E’s Signature Series Heads to Sib Net.” Variety 4 Jun. 2006. 1 June 2008 ‹http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117944601.html?categoryid=1238&cs=1>. Donaldson, Ian. “Matters of Life and Death: The Return of Biography.” Australian Book Review 286 (Nov. 2006): 23–29. Douglas, Kate. “‘Blurbing’ Biographical: Authorship and Autobiography.” Biography 24.4 (2001): 806–26. Eliot, Simon. “Very Necessary but not Sufficient: A Personal View of Quantitative Analysis in Book History.” Book History 5 (2002): 283–93. Feather, John, and Hazel Woodbridge. “Bestsellers in the British Book Industry.” Publishing Research Quarterly 23.3 (Sept. 2007): 210–23. Feather, JP, and M Reid. “Bestsellers and the British Book Industry.” Publishing Research Quarterly 11.1 (1995): 57–72. Galligan, Anne. “Living in the Marketplace: Publishing in the 1990s.” Publishing Studies 7 (1999): 36–44. Grossman, Lev. “Time’s Person of the Year: You.” Time 13 Dec. 2006. Online edition. 1 June 2008 ‹http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0%2C9171%2C1569514%2C00.html>. Gutjahr, Paul C. “No Longer Left Behind: Amazon.com, Reader Response, and the Changing Fortunes of the Christian Novel in America.” Book History 5 (2002): 209–36. Hamilton, Nigel. Biography: A Brief History. Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP, 2007. Kaplan, Justin. “A Culture of Biography.” The Literary Biography: Problems and Solutions. Ed. Dale Salwak. Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1996. 1–11. Korda, Michael. Making the List: A Cultural History of the American Bestseller 1900–1999. New York: Barnes & Noble, 2001. Miller, Laura J. “The Bestseller List as Marketing Tool and Historical Fiction.” Book History 3 (2000): 286–304. Morreale, Joanne. “Revisiting The Osbournes: The Hybrid Reality-Sitcom.” Journal of Film and Video 55.1 (Spring 2003): 3–15. Rak, Julie. “Bio-Power: CBC Television’s Life & Times and A&E Network’s Biography on A&E.” LifeWriting 1.2 (2005): 1–18. Starck, Nigel. “Capturing Life—Not Death: A Case For Burying The Posthumous Parallax.” Text: The Journal of the Australian Association of Writing Programs 5.2 (2001). 1 June 2008 ‹http://www.textjournal.com.au/oct01/starck.htm>.

This thesis examines the methods through which Gail Anderson-Dargatz and Ann-Marie MacDonald construct region in their novels The Cure for Death by Lightning and Fall on Your Knees. These texts, like all successful regional novels, describe more than geography. Their regions are also functions of time. I introduce the term "temporal region" to describe the spaces created by this interdependence of time and place. I then focus upon the specifics of descriptive and narrative approach that lead to the convincing portrayal of the Shuswap and Cape Breton Island in the texts. Anderson-Dargatz and MacDonald direct attention to the foddways of their regions, expressing the connection between consumption choices and a society's historical and physical location. The authors also articulate their regions by highlighting cultural diversity in the areas they describe. In this way they deny the social homogeneity more sentimental regional texts often rely upon. Finally, the novelists use an appropriately Canadian method of regional opposition to define their temporal regions according to that which they are not ~ they are not American, glamorous, or urban. They therefore must be Canadian, quotidian, and rural.

In zijn professionele leven was Kees Jiskoot arts. Hij deed zijn artsexamen in 1960 aan de Universiteit van Utrecht, was vervolgens gouvernementsarts in voormalig Nederlands Nieuw-Guinea, huisarts in Terneuzen en verzekeringsarts in Goes. Zoals dat bij meer artsen het geval is (Vestdijk, Slauerhoff, Brakman, Tsjechov, Boelgakov en talloze anderen) trok hem de literatuur. Hij legde zich toe op het schrijven van light verse, dat hij vooral publiceerde in het tijdschrift De Tweede Ronde, en waarvoor hij in 2003 de Kees Stipprijs kreeg. Serieuzer was zijn vertaalwerk. Hij vertaalde alle (154) sonnetten van Shakespeare, tevens diens lange gedicht Venus en Adonis. Zijn belangrijkste sporen heeft hij echter verdiend met het vertalen van Russische poëzie, in het bijzonder werk van Michail Lermontov, Sergej Jesenin en Anna Achmatova.

Margaretha Anna Sophia Meyboom werd op 29 juli 1856 in Amsterdam geboren als tweede dochter in een domineesgezin. Haar ouders Angenis Henriette Frederika Tydeman (1828-1898) en Louis Susan Pedro Meyboom (1817-1874) hadden in totaal acht kinderen. De ouderlijke omgeving en vooral haar vader hadden een grote invloed op Meybooms leven en werk. Haar vader legde de basis voor haar twee grote passies, maatschappelijk engagement en interesse in het Noorden. Enerzijds was L.S.P. Meyboom een pionier op het gebied van moderne theologie, anderzijds was hij ook zeer geïnteresseerd in oude, heidense religies en schreef hij onder meer het boek De godsdienst der oude Noormannen1, waaruit hij zijn kinderen voorlas. Dit boek lijkt het beginpunt te zijn geweest voor Margaretha’s literaire interesse. In navolging van haar vader – hij had Deens geleerd door middel van vergelijkende bijbelstudies – begon Margaretha zichzelf op zeventienjarige leeftijd Deens te leren met behulp van een Deense grammatica en andere Scandinavische boeken die ze in de bibliotheek van haar vader had gevonden. De dominee van de Noorse Zeemanskerk hielp haar met de uitspraak.2 Al snel begon Meyboom ook vertalingen te maken van verhalen uit deze boeken, die ze opstuurde naar het dagblad Het Nieuws van den Dag, waar ze als feuilleton werden gepubliceerd. Zo werd de vertaalster geboren. Vermoedelijk is haar eerste gepubliceerde vertaling “Filia maris” van de Deen Johanne Schjørring (1836-1910) in 1880. Meybooms eerste vertalingen verschenen onder het pseudoniem Urda (een van de Noordse godinnen van het lot). Vanaf het moment dat ze hele boeken begon te vertalen – in 1891 als eerste Judas van Tor Hedberg (1862-1931) – publiceerde ze onder haar eigen naam. In totaal heeft Meyboom meer dan vijftig werken van Scandinavische auteurs vertaald. Met uitzondering van de Zweedse Selma Lagerlöf (1858-1940) en Tor Hedberg (1862-1931), waren dit Deense en Noorse auteurs, onder wie de Noren Bjørnstjerne Bjørnson (1832-1910), Henrik Ibsen (1828-1906), Knut Hamsun (1860-1952), Alexander Kielland (1849-1906), Arne Garborg (1851-1924), de Denen Carl Ewald (1856-1908), Adda Ravnkilde (1862-1883), en vele anderen. Ze liet het Nederlandse publiek kennismaken met de moderne literaire en sociale ideeën van Scandinavische schrijvers zoals Ibsen, Bjørnson en Lagerlöf.

Historia Pomocniczej Służby Kobiet w Polskich Siłach Zbrojnych na Zachodzie nie została dotychczas gruntownie zbadana i opisana. Nie powstała jeszcze żadna monografia na ten temat. Najbardziej znanymi opracowaniami są Pomocnicza Wojskowa Służba Kobiet 2 KP (1941–1945) Anny Bobińskiej oraz Pomocnicza Służba Kobiet w Polskich Siłach Zbrojnych w okresie II wojny światowej Wandy Maćkowskiej. Obydwa zostały napisane przez świadków tamtych wydarzeń (Anna Bobińska należała do PSK), a więc nie są obiektywne i ograniczają się jedynie do ogólnego opisu dziejów formacji, a w zasadzie przedstawienia najważniejszych dokumentów – głównie rozkazów organizacyjnych i sprawozdań. W 1941 r. zaczęto przyjmować kobiety do Armii Andersa i wydawać rozkazy i zarządzenia regulujące zasady ich służby. Jednocześnie od 1942 r. powstawały pododdziały kobiece w Wielkiej Brytanii, gdzie w listopadzie tego roku utworzono Komendę Główną PSK w Londynie. Ostateczny rozkaz organizacyjny regulujący zasady służby kobiet w PSZ na Zachodzie został wydany w lipcu 1944 r.

Nesten ni av ti arbeidstakere drikker alkohol. Dette blir ofte forklart med alle de positive aspektene bruk av alkohol har i sosiale sammenhenger. En kartlegging utført av Statistisk sentralbyrå viser imidlertid at 17 prosent av befolkningen har et drikkemønster som kan betegnes som risikofylt (Halkjelsvik & Storvoll, 2014). Økt alkoholkonsum, herunder også arbeidsrelatert alkoholkonsum, henger blant annet sammen med økt tilgjengelighet til alkohol (Frøyland, 2005). Alkoholkonsum på et risikofylt nivå er forbundet med sosiale, medisinske, jobbrelaterte og økonomiske problemstillinger (Babor, Higgins-Biddle, Saunders & Monteiro, 2001). Det er vanskelig å gi et klart svar på hvor grensen for risikofylt drikking går. Grenseverdier på 14 alkoholenheter1 pr. uke for kvinner og 21 enheter pr. uke for menn har blitt foreslått (Fauske, 1993). Babor mfl. (2001) har fremhevet at såkalt "lavrisikodrikking" innebærer maksimalt 20 gram alkohol pr. dag maksimalt 5 dager i uken. Det amerikanske National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (2016) understreker at grenseverdien for risikodrikking går ved 7 enheter pr. uke (og maksimalt 3 enheter på én dag) for kvinner og ved 14 enheter pr. uke (og maksimalt 4 enheter på én dag) for menn. Likevel vil slike grenseverdier alltid være kulturspesifikke og individuelle. I Norge har man funnet det hensiktsmessig å operere med verdier på 8 alkoholenheter pr. uke for kvinner og 13 enheter pr. uke for menn (Nesvåg & Lie, 2004). Forskning har vist at det er behov for å kartlegge mer enn bare antall alkoholenheter over tid for å vite noe om reell risikodrikking. Eksempelvis vil forhold som hvor mye en drikker ved hver situasjon kunne medføre mer negative konsekvenser for sykefravær enn hvor mye en typisk drikker over en gitt periode (Bacharach, Bamberger & Biron, 2010). Dette kan forklares ved at helsekonsekvenser av høyt gjennomsnittsforbruk først viser seg over tid, mens episoder med stordrikking (såkalt binge-drikking der en drikker store mengder alkohol ved én og samme anledning, ofte målt som >6 enheter) gjerne medfører midlertidige funksjonsnedsettelser (eksempelvis "fyllesyke") som kan resultere i sykefravær (Bacharach mfl., 2010; Salonsalmi, Laaksonen, Lahlema & Rahkonen, 2009) eller sykenærvær, dvs. å være på jobben uten å kunne yte som normalt. Individuelle forskjeller vil også spille en rolle med hensyn til hva som er risikofylt drikking. Det er individuelt hvor mye en tåler, og andre aspekter ved livsstilen, for eksempel om en er fysisk aktiv, vil kunne påvirke hvor mye en kan drikke før negative konsekvenser inntreffer. For enkelte grupper vil ethvert alkoholinntak kunne betraktes som risikofylt. Dette gjelder for eksempel: (1) personer som skal kjøre bil eller håndtere maskiner/verktøy, (2) personer som bruker medisiner som interagerer med alkohol, (3) personer som har en medisinsk tilstand som kan forverres av alkohol, og (4) personer som er gravide (National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, 2016). I Norge drikkes det lite i direkte arbeidssituasjoner, men alkoholbruk relatert til arbeidssammenhenger hevdes å være utbredt (Frøyland, 2005). Sammenkomster som inkluderer alkohol foregår da utenfor primærarbeidstiden, men i regi av arbeidsplassen, kunder/klienter eller på initiativ fra kollegaer. Bruk av alkohol skjer dermed i gråsoner mellom arbeid og fritid. Nesvåg (2005) fant at 23 prosent av det samlede alkoholkonsumet blant et utvalg ansatte i privat norsk næringsliv var arbeidsrelatert. Flere studier har pekt på at ansatte, både på ledernivå og medarbeidernivå, har positive forventninger til jobbrelatert alkoholbruk, herunder forventninger om at alkohol er en effektiv strategi for å mestre arbeidsbelastninger og at alkohol bidrar til å skape gode fellesskap og sosiale relasjoner (Cooper, Russell & Frone, 1990; Henderson, Hutcheson & Davies, 1996). Normer og forventninger utvikles og formes i relasjonelt samspill, blant annet på arbeidsplassen (Kjærheim, Mykletun, Aasland, Haldorsen & Andersen, 1995) og disse normene og forventningene påvirker ansattes alkoholvaner (Ames & Janes, 1992). Ansattes alkoholnormer og –forventninger kan således betraktes som uttrykk for en felles kultur på arbeidsplassen, som i større eller mindre grad kan gjenspeiles i de ansattes alkoholbruk. Tradisjonelt sett har det vært gruppen med store alkoholproblemer som har fått tilbud og oppmerksomhet gjennom arbeidsplassens helse-, miljø- og sikkerhetsarbeid. Her har man i de senere årene sett en endring i retning av økt fokus på den betydelig større gruppen som drikker risikofylt. Dette er bakgrunnen for prosjektet WIRUS, som er finansiert av Helsedirektoratet. I prosjektet deltar blant annet en privat transportbedrift. Denne rapporten er en presentasjon av denne bedriftens resultater fra fire av temaene som inngår i WIRUS-studien: (1) alkoholbruk, (2) arbeidsrelaterte alkoholnormer, (3) forventninger til alkoholbruk, og (4) situasjoner tilknyttet den aktuelle bedriften der ansatte eksponeres for alkohol.

Nesten ni av ti arbeidstakere drikker alkohol. Dette blir ofte forklart med alle de positive aspektene bruk av alkohol har i sosiale sammenhenger. En kartlegging utført av Statistisk sentralbyrå viser imidlertid at 17 prosent av befolkningen har et drikkemønster som kan betegnes som risikofylt (Halkjelsvik & Storvoll, 2014). Økt alkoholkonsum, herunder også arbeidsrelatert alkoholkonsum, henger blant annet sammen med økt tilgjengelighet til alkohol (Frøyland, 2005). Alkoholkonsum på et risikofylt nivå er forbundet med sosiale, medisinske, jobbrelaterte og økonomiske problemstillinger (Babor, Higgins-Biddle, Saunders & Monteiro, 2001). Det er vanskelig å gi et klart svar på hvor grensen for risikofylt drikking går. Grenseverdier på 14 alkoholenheter[1] pr. uke for kvinner og 21 enheter pr. uke for menn har blitt foreslått (Fauske, 1993). Babor mfl. (2001) har fremhevet at såkalt "lavrisikodrikking" innebærer maksimalt 20 gram alkohol pr. dag maksimalt 5 dager i uken. Det amerikanske National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (2016) understreker at grenseverdien for risikodrikking går ved 7 enheter pr. uke (og maksimalt 3 enheter på én dag) for kvinner og ved 14 enheter pr. uke (og maksimalt 4 enheter på én dag) for menn. Likevel vil slike grenseverdier alltid være kulturspesifikke og individuelle. I Norge har man funnet det hensiktsmessig å operere med verdier på 8 alkoholenheter pr. uke for kvinner og 13 enheter pr. uke for menn (Nesvåg & Lie, 2004). Forskning har vist at det er behov for å kartlegge mer enn bare antall alkoholenheter over tid for å vite noe om reell risikodrikking. Eksempelvis vil forhold som hvor mye en drikker ved hver situasjon kunne medføre mer negative konsekvenser for sykefravær enn hvor mye en typisk drikker over en gitt periode (Bacharach, Bamberger & Biron, 2010). Dette kan forklares ved at helsekonsekvenser av høyt gjennomsnittsforbruk først viser seg over tid, mens episoder med stordrikking (såkalt binge-drikking der en drikker store mengder alkohol ved én og samme anledning) gjerne medfører midlertidige funksjonsnedsettelser (eksempelvis "fyllesyke") som kan resultere i sykefravær (Bacharach mfl., 2010; Salonsalmi, Laaksonen, Lahlema & Rahkonen, 2009) eller sykenærvær, dvs. å være på jobben uten å kunne yte som normalt. Individuelle forskjeller vil også spille en rolle med hensyn til hva som er risikofylt drikking. Det er individuelt hvor mye en tåler, og andre aspekter ved livsstilen, for eksempel om en er fysisk aktiv, vil kunne påvirke hvor mye en kan drikke før negative konsekvenser inntreffer. For enkelte grupper vil ethvert alkoholinntak kunne betraktes som risikofylt. Dette gjelder for eksempel: (1) personer som skal kjøre bil eller håndtere maskiner/verktøy, (2) personer som bruker medisiner som interagerer med alkohol, (3) personer som har en medisinsk tilstand som kan forverres av alkohol, og (4) personer som er gravide (National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, 2016). I Norge drikkes det lite i direkte arbeidssituasjoner, men alkoholbruk relatert til arbeidssammenhenger hevdes å være utbredt (Frøyland, 2005). Sammenkomster som inkluderer alkohol foregår da utenfor primærarbeidstiden, men i regi av arbeidsplassen, kunder/klienter eller på initiativ fra kollegaer. Bruk av alkohol skjer dermed i gråsoner mellom arbeid og fritid. Nesvåg (2005) fant at 23 prosent av det samlede alkoholkonsumet blant et utvalg ansatte i privat norsk næringsliv var arbeidsrelatert. Flere studier har pekt på at ansatte, både på ledernivå og medarbeidernivå, har positive forventninger til jobbrelatert alkoholbruk, herunder forventninger om at alkohol er en effektiv strategi for å mestre arbeidsbelastninger og at alkohol bidrar til å skape gode fellesskap og sosiale relasjoner (Cooper, Russell & Frone, 1990; Henderson, Hutcheson & Davies, 1996). Normer og forventninger utvikles og formes i relasjonelt samspill, blant annet på arbeidsplassen (Kjærheim, Mykletun, Aasland, Haldorsen & Andersen, 1995) og disse normene og forventningene påvirker ansattes alkoholvaner (Ames & Janes, 1992). Ansattes alkoholnormer og –forventninger kan således betraktes som uttrykk for en felles kultur på arbeidsplassen, som i større eller mindre grad kan gjenspeiles i de ansattes alkoholbruk. Tradisjonelt sett har det vært gruppen med store alkoholproblemer som har fått tilbud og oppmerksomhet gjennom arbeidsplassens helse-, miljø- og sikkerhetsarbeid. Her har man i de senere årene sett en endring i retning av økt fokus på den betydelig større gruppen som drikker risikofylt. Dette er bakgrunnen for prosjektet WIRUS, som er finansiert av Helsedirektoratet. I prosjektet deltar blant annet et offentlig forvaltningsorgan. Denne rapporten er en presentasjon av denne bedriftens resultater fra fire av områdene som inngår i WIRUS-studien: (1) alkoholbruk, (2) arbeidsrelaterte alkoholnormer, (3) forventninger til alkoholbruk, og (4) situasjoner tilknyttet den aktuelle bedriften der ansatte eksponeres for alkohol.

Nesten ni av ti arbeidstakere drikker alkohol. Dette blir ofte forklart med alle de positive aspektene bruk av alkohol har i sosiale sammenhenger. En kartlegging utført av Statistisk sentralbyrå viser imidlertid at 17 prosent av befolkningen har et drikkemønster som kan betegnes som risikofylt (Halkjelsvik & Storvoll, 2014). Økt alkoholkonsum, herunder også arbeidsrelatert alkoholkonsum, henger blant annet sammen med økt tilgjengelighet til alkohol (Frøyland, 2005). Alkoholkonsum på et risikofylt nivå er forbundet med sosiale, medisinske, jobbrelaterte og økonomiske problemstillinger (Babor, Higgins-Biddle, Saunders & Monteiro, 2001). Det er vanskelig å gi et klart svar på hvor grensen for risikofylt drikking går. Grenseverdier på 14 alkoholenheter pr. uke for kvinner og 21 enheter pr. uke for menn har blitt foreslått (Fauske, 1993). Babor mfl. (2001) har fremhevet at såkalt "lavrisikodrikking" innebærer maksimalt 20 gram alkohol pr. dag maksimalt 5 dager i uken. Det amerikanske National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (2016) understreker at grenseverdien for risikodrikking går ved 7 enheter pr. uke (og maksimalt 3 enheter på én dag) for kvinner og ved 14 enheter pr. uke (og maksimalt 4 enheter på én dag) for menn. Likevel vil slike grenseverdier alltid være kulturspesifikke og individuelle. I Norge har man funnet det hensiktsmessig å operere med verdier på 8 alkoholenheter pr. uke for kvinner og 13 enheter pr. uke for menn (Nesvåg & Lie, 2004). Forskning har vist at det er behov for å kartlegge mer enn bare antall alkoholenheter over tid for å vite noe om reell risikodrikking. Eksempelvis vil forhold som hvor mye en drikker ved hver situasjon kunne medføre mer negative konsekvenser for sykefravær enn hvor mye en typisk drikker over en gitt periode (Bacharach, Bamberger & Biron, 2010). Dette kan forklares ved at helsekonsekvenser av høyt gjennomsnittsforbruk først viser seg over tid, mens episoder med stordrikking (såkalt binge-drikking der en drikker store mengder alkohol ved én og samme anledning) gjerne medfører midlertidige funksjonsnedsettelser (eksempelvis "fyllesyke") som kan resultere i sykefravær (Bacharach mfl., 2010; Salonsalmi, Laaksonen, Lahlema & Rahkonen, 2009) eller sykenærvær, dvs. å være på jobben uten å kunne yte som normalt. Individuelle forskjeller vil også spille en rolle med hensyn til hva som er risikofylt drikking. Det er individuelt hvor mye en tåler, og andre aspekter ved livsstilen, for eksempel om en er fysisk aktiv, vil kunne påvirke hvor mye en kan drikke før negative konsekvenser inntreffer. For enkelte grupper vil ethvert alkoholinntak kunne betraktes som risikofylt. Dette gjelder for eksempel: (1) personer som skal kjøre bil eller håndtere maskiner/verktøy, (2) personer som bruker medisiner som interagerer med alkohol, (3) personer som har en medisinsk tilstand som kan forverres av alkohol, og (4) personer som er gravide (National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, 2016). I Norge drikkes det lite i direkte arbeidssituasjoner, men alkoholbruk relatert til arbeidssammenhenger hevdes å være utbredt (Frøyland, 2005). Sammenkomster som inkluderer alkohol foregår da utenfor primærarbeidstiden, men i regi av arbeidsplassen, kunder/klienter eller på initiativ fra kollegaer. Bruk av alkohol skjer dermed i gråsoner mellom arbeid og fritid. Nesvåg (2005) fant at 23 prosent av det samlede alkoholkonsumet blant et utvalg ansatte i privat norsk næringsliv var arbeidsrelatert. Flere studier har pekt på at ansatte, både på ledernivå og medarbeidernivå, har positive forventninger til jobbrelatert alkoholbruk, herunder forventninger om at alkohol er en effektiv strategi for å mestre arbeidsbelastninger og at alkohol bidrar til å skape gode fellesskap og sosiale relasjoner (Cooper, Russell & Frone, 1990; Henderson, Hutcheson & Davies, 1996). Normer og forventninger utvikles og formes i relasjonelt samspill, blant annet på arbeidsplassen (Kjærheim, Mykletun, Aasland, Haldorsen & Andersen, 1995) og disse normene og forventningene påvirker ansattes alkoholvaner (Ames & Janes, 1992). Ansattes alkoholnormer og –forventninger kan således betraktes som uttrykk for en felles kultur på arbeidsplassen, som i større eller mindre grad kan gjenspeiles i de ansattes alkoholbruk. Tradisjonelt sett har det vært gruppen med store alkoholproblemer som har fått tilbud og oppmerksomhet gjennom arbeidsplassens helse-, miljø- og sikkerhetsarbeid. Her har man i de senere årene sett en endring i retning av økt fokus på den betydelig større gruppen som drikker risikofylt. Dette er bakgrunnen for prosjektet WIRUS, som er finansiert av Helsedirektoratet. I prosjektet deltar blant annet et offentlig forvaltningsorgan. Denne rapporten er en presentasjon av denne bedriftens resultater fra fire av områdene som inngår i WIRUS-studien: (1) alkoholbruk, (2) arbeidsrelaterte alkoholnormer, (3) forventninger til alkoholbruk, og (4) situasjoner tilknyttet den aktuelle bedriften der ansatte eksponeres for alkohol.

Nesten ni av ti arbeidstakere drikker alkohol. Dette blir ofte forklart med alle de positive aspektene bruk av alkohol har i sosiale sammenhenger. En kartlegging utført av Statistisk sentralbyrå viser imidlertid at 17 prosent av befolkningen har et drikkemønster som kan betegnes som risikofylt (Halkjelsvik & Storvoll, 2014). Økt alkoholkonsum, herunder også arbeidsrelatert alkoholkonsum, henger blant annet sammen med økt tilgjengelighet til alkohol (Frøyland, 2005). Alkoholkonsum på et risikofylt nivå er forbundet med sosiale, medisinske, jobbrelaterte og økonomiske problemstillinger (Babor, Higgins-Biddle, Saunders & Monteiro, 2001). Det er vanskelig å gi et klart svar på hvor grensen for risikofylt drikking går. Grenseverdier på 14 alkoholenheter pr. uke for kvinner og 21 enheter pr. uke for menn har blitt foreslått (Fauske, 1993). Babor mfl. (2001) har fremhevet at såkalt "lavrisikodrikking" innebærer maksimalt 20 gram alkohol pr. dag maksimalt 5 dager i uken. Det amerikanske National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (2016) understreker at grenseverdien for risikodrikking går ved 7 enheter pr. uke (og maksimalt 3 enheter på én dag) for kvinner og ved 14 enheter pr. uke (og maksimalt 4 enheter på én dag) for menn. Likevel vil slike grenseverdier alltid være kulturspesifikke og individuelle. I Norge har man funnet det hensiktsmessig å operere med verdier på 8 alkoholenheter pr. uke for kvinner og 13 enheter pr. uke for menn (Nesvåg & Lie, 2004). Forskning har vist at det er behov for å kartlegge mer enn bare antall alkoholenheter over tid for å vite noe om reell risikodrikking. Eksempelvis vil forhold som hvor mye en drikker ved hver situasjon kunne medføre mer negative konsekvenser for sykefravær enn hvor mye en typisk drikker over en gitt periode (Bacharach, Bamberger & Biron, 2010). Dette kan forklares ved at helsekonsekvenser av høyt gjennomsnittsforbruk først viser seg over tid, mens episoder med stordrikking (såkalt binge-drikking der en drikker store mengder alkohol ved én og samme anledning) gjerne medfører midlertidige funksjonsnedsettelser (eksempelvis "fyllesyke") som kan resultere i sykefravær (Bacharach mfl., 2010; Salonsalmi, Laaksonen, Lahlema & Rahkonen, 2009) eller sykenærvær, dvs. å være på jobben uten å kunne yte som normalt. Individuelle forskjeller vil også spille en rolle med hensyn til hva som er risikofylt drikking. Det er individuelt hvor mye en tåler, og andre aspekter ved livsstilen, for eksempel om en er fysisk aktiv, vil kunne påvirke hvor mye en kan drikke før negative konsekvenser inntreffer. For enkelte grupper vil ethvert alkoholinntak kunne betraktes som risikofylt. Dette gjelder for eksempel: (1) personer som skal kjøre bil eller håndtere maskiner/verktøy, (2) personer som bruker medisiner som interagerer med alkohol, (3) personer som har en medisinsk tilstand som kan forverres av alkohol, og (4) personer som er gravide (National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, 2016). I Norge drikkes det lite i direkte arbeidssituasjoner, men alkoholbruk relatert til arbeidssammenhenger hevdes å være utbredt (Frøyland, 2005). Sammenkomster som inkluderer alkohol foregår da utenfor primærarbeidstiden, men i regi av arbeidsplassen, kunder/klienter eller på initiativ fra kollegaer. Bruk av alkohol skjer dermed i gråsoner mellom arbeid og fritid. Nesvåg (2005) fant at 23 prosent av det samlede alkoholkonsumet blant et utvalg ansatte i privat norsk næringsliv var arbeidsrelatert. Flere studier har pekt på at ansatte, både på ledernivå og medarbeidernivå, har positive forventninger til jobbrelatert alkoholbruk, herunder forventninger om at alkohol er en effektiv strategi for å mestre arbeidsbelastninger og at alkohol bidrar til å skape gode fellesskap og sosiale relasjoner (Cooper, Russell & Frone, 1990; Henderson, Hutcheson & Davies, 1996). Normer og forventninger utvikles og formes i relasjonelt samspill, blant annet på arbeidsplassen (Kjærheim, Mykletun, Aasland, Haldorsen & Andersen, 1995) og disse normene og forventningene påvirker ansattes alkoholvaner (Ames & Janes, 1992). Ansattes alkoholnormer og –forventninger kan således betraktes som uttrykk for en felles kultur på arbeidsplassen, som i større eller mindre grad kan gjenspeiles i de ansattes alkoholbruk. Tradisjonelt sett har det vært gruppen med store alkoholproblemer som har fått tilbud og oppmerksomhet gjennom arbeidsplassens helse-, miljø- og sikkerhetsarbeid. Her har man i de senere årene sett en endring i retning av økt fokus på den betydelig større gruppen som drikker risikofylt. Dette er bakgrunnen for prosjektet WIRUS, som er finansiert av Helsedirektoratet. I prosjektet deltar blant annet en privat bedrift innen industrien. Denne rapporten er en presentasjon av denne bedriftens resultater fra fire av områdene som inngår i WIRUS-studien: (1) alkoholbruk, (2) arbeidsrelaterte alkoholnormer, (3) forventninger til alkoholbruk, og (4) situasjoner tilknyttet den aktuelle bedriften der ansatte eksponeres for alkohol.

Nesten ni av ti arbeidstakere drikker alkohol. Dette blir ofte forklart med alle de positive aspektene bruk av alkohol har i sosiale sammenhenger. En kartlegging utført av Statistisk sentralbyrå viser imidlertid at 17 prosent av befolkningen har et drikkemønster som kan betegnes som risikofylt (Halkjelsvik & Storvoll, 2014). Økt alkoholkonsum, herunder også arbeidsrelatert alkoholkonsum, henger blant annet sammen med økt tilgjengelighet til alkohol (Frøyland, 2005). Alkoholkonsum på et risikofylt nivå er forbundet med sosiale, medisinske, jobbrelaterte og økonomiske problemer (Babor, Higgins-Biddle, Saunders & Monteiro, 2001). Det er vanskelig å gi et klart svar på hvor grensen for risikofylt drikking går. Grenseverdier på 14 alkoholenheter pr. uke for kvinner og 21 enheter pr. uke for menn har blitt foreslått (Fauske, 1993). Babor et al. (2001) har fremhevet at såkalt "lavrisikodrikking" innebærer maksimalt 20 gram alkohol pr. dag maksimalt 5 dager i uken. Det amerikanske National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (2016) understreker at grenseverdien for risikodrikking går ved 7 enheter pr. uke (og maksimalt 3 enheter på én dag) for kvinner og ved 14 enheter pr. uke (og maksimalt 4 enheter på én dag) for menn. Likevel vil slike grenseverdier alltid være kulturspesifikke, og i Norge har man funnet det hensiktsmessig å operere med verdier på 8 alkoholenheter pr. uke for kvinner og 13 enheter pr. uke for menn (Nesvåg & Lie, 2004). Forskning har vist at det er behov for å kartlegge mer enn bare antall alkoholenheter over tid for å vite noe om reell risikodrikking. Eksempelvis vil forhold som hvor mye en drikker ved hver drikkeanledning kunne medføre mer negative konsekvenser for sykefravær enn hvor mye en typisk drikker over en gitt periode (Bacharach, Bamberger & Biron, 2010). Dette kan forklares ved at helsekonsekvenser av høyt gjennomsnittsforbruk først viser seg over tid, mens episoder med stordrikking (såkalt binge-drikking der en drikker store mengder alkohol ved én og samme anledning) gjerne medfører midlertidige funksjonsnedsettelser (eksempelvis "fyllesyke") som resulterer i sykefravær (Bacharach et al., 2010; Salonsalmi, Laaksonen, Lahlema & Rahkonen, 2009). Individuelle forskjeller vil også spille en rolle med hensyn til hva som er risikofylt drikking. Det er individuelt hvor mye en tåler og andre aspekter ved livsstilen, for eksempel om en er fysisk aktiv, vil kunne påvirke hvor mye en tåler før negative konsekvenser inntreffer. For enkelte grupper vil ethvert alkoholinntak kunne betraktes som risikofylt. Dette gjelder for eksempel: (1) personer som skal kjøre bil eller håndtere maskiner/verktøy, (2) personer som bruker medisiner som interagerer med alkohol, (3) personer som har en medisinsk tilstand som kan forverres av alkohol, og (4) personer som er gravide (National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, 2016). I Norge drikkes det lite i direkte arbeidssituasjoner, men alkoholbruk relatert til arbeidssammenhenger hevdes å være utbredt (Frøyland, 2005). Sammenkomster som inkluderer alkohol foregår da på fritiden, men i regi av arbeidsplassen, kunder/klienter eller på initiativ fra kollegaer. Dette skjer dermed i gråsoner mellom arbeid og fritid. Nesvåg (2005) fant at 23 prosent av det samlede alkoholkonsumet blant et utvalg ansatte i privat norsk næringsliv var arbeidsrelatert. Flere studier har pekt på at ansatte, både på ledernivå og medarbeidernivå, har positive forventninger til jobbrelatert alkoholbruk, herunder forventninger om at alkohol er en effektiv strategi for å mestre arbeidsbelastninger og at alkohol bidrar til å skape gode fellesskap og sosiale relasjoner (Cooper, Russell & Frone, 1990; Henderson, Hutcheson & Davies, 1996). Normer og forventninger utvikles og formes i relasjonelt samspill, blant annet på arbeidsplassen, (Kjærheim, Mykletun, Aasland, Haldorsen & Andersen, 1995) og disse normene og forventningene påvirker ansattes alkoholvaner (Ames & Janes, 1992). Ansattes alkoholnormer og –forventninger kan således betraktes som uttrykk for en felles kultur på arbeidsplassen, som i større eller mindre grad kan gjenspeiles i de ansattes alkoholbruk. Tradisjonelt sett har det vært gruppen med store alkoholproblemer som har fått tilbud og oppmerksomhet gjennom arbeidsplassens helse-, miljø- og sikkerhetsarbeid. Her har man i de senere årene sett en endring i retning av økt fokus på den betydelig større gruppen som drikker risikofylt. Dette er bakgrunnen for prosjektet WIRUS, som er finansiert av Helsedirektoratet. I dette prosjektet deltar blant annet en privat bedrift innen olje- og gassnæringen. Denne rapporten er en presentasjon av denne bedriftens resultater fra fire av områdene som inngår i WIRUS-studien: (1) alkoholbruk, (2) arbeidsrelaterte alkoholnormer, (3) alkoholforventninger, og (4) situasjoner tilknyttet den aktuelle bedriften der alkoholbruk inngår. Målet med denne rapporten er å beskrive alkoholbruken, arbeidsrelaterte alkoholnormer og alkoholforventninger blant ansatte i denne bedriften, og beskrive hvilke jobbrelaterte situasjoner ansatte i bedriften drikker alkohol. Rapporten kan brukes som et kunnskapsgrunnlag for arbeid med ruspolicy tilknyttet arbeidsplassen, og i gråsonen mellom jobb og fritid.