53 results
Chapter V - Sir John Borlase Warren and the Royal Navy's Blockades of the United States in the War of 1812
-
- By Brian Arthur
- Edited by Brian Vale
-
- Book:
- The Naval Miscellany
- Published by:
- Boydell & Brewer
- Published online:
- 05 March 2024, pp 205-246
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
The Descent into War
The origins of the changed relationship between Britain and the United States, from interdependent trading partners to enemies in the War of 1812, can be found in the Treaty of Paris of 1783, which had ended the previous Anglo-American War. Heated debate in Britain over future trade with its former American colonies often focused on the extent of American trade with the British West Indian ‘sugar islands’, as did the influential writer Lord Sheffield. Nevertheless, in time, a mutually beneficial ‘Atlantic economy’ had reasserted itself – each country became the other's major customer and source of supply. American wheat, flour, rice, timber, tobacco and raw cotton found outlets in Britain and its overseas territories, while the United States, as a predominantly agrarian economy and growing market for British manufactures and re-exports, became crucially important to Britain's economic development. By 1810, although America had an adverse balance of trade with Britain, often resented by contemporary American commentators, its merchant navy of over a million tons carried over 90 per cent of its overseas trade, and earned more than enough to produce a favourable balance of payments for the United States.
However, a French declaration of war on Britain in 1793 meant more frequent contact between American merchant vessels and warships of the Royal Navy, as Britain imposed maritime blockades on France, and neutral American vessels sought to gain the trade denied to French shipping. American shippers increasingly maintained that ‘Free Ships’ meant ‘Free Goods’ which were not subject to British ‘stop and search’, or confiscation of cargoes as broadly defined contraband. Furthermore, the Royal Navy would soon seek to ease its perpetual manpower shortage by impressing apparently British seamen – but often, in fact, American citizens – from American merchant vessels, sufficiently often to strain diplomatic relations . By 1807, of the 55,000 seamen engaged in American overseas trade, no less than 40 per cent were British born. Between 1803 and 1812, the Royal Navy may have impressed as many as 6,000 Americans. Neither nation could afford the loss of so many trained seamen. The forcible British seizure of four men from USS Chesapeake, a United States warship leaving an American port in June 1807, brought war very close.
Randomized controlled trial of a group peer mentoring model for U.S. academic medicine research faculty
- Linda H. Pololi, Arthur T. Evans, Mark Brimhall-Vargas, Janet T. Civian, Lisa A. Cooper, Brian K. Gibbs, Kacy Ninteau, Vasilia Vasiliou, Robert T. Brennan
-
- Journal:
- Journal of Clinical and Translational Science / Volume 7 / Issue 1 / 2023
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 22 August 2023, e174
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
Introduction:
Midcareer is a critical transition point for biomedical research faculty and a common dropout point from an NIH-funded career. We report a study to assess the efficacy of a group peer mentoring program for diverse biomedical researchers in academic medicine, seeking to improve vitality, career advancement, and cross-cultural competence.
Methods:We conducted a stratified randomized controlled trial with a waitlist control group involving 40 purposefully diverse early midcareer research faculty from 16 states who had a first-time NIH R01 (or equivalent) award, a K training grant, or a similar major grant. The yearlong intervention (2 to 3 days quarterly) consisted of facilitated, structured, group peer mentoring. Main study aims were to enhance faculty vitality, self-efficacy in achieving research success, career advancement, mentoring others, and cultural awareness and appreciation of diversity in the workplace.
Results:Compared to the control group, the intervention group’s increased vitality did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.20), but perceived change in vitality was 1.47 standard deviations higher (D = 1.47, P = 0.03). Self-efficacy for career advancement was higher in the intervention group (D = 0.41, P = 0.05) as was self-efficacy for research (D = 0.57, P = 0.02). The intervention group also valued diversity higher (D = 0.46, P = 0.02), had higher cognitive empathy (D = 0.85, P = 0.03), higher anti-sexism/racism skills (D = 0.71, P = 0.01), and higher self-efficacy in mentoring others (D = 1.14, P = 0.007).
Conclusions:The mentoring intervention resulted in meaningful change in important dimensions and skills among a national sample of diverse early midcareer biomedical faculty. This mentoring program holds promise for addressing the urgencies of sustaining faculty vitality and cross-cultural competence.
Are researchers in academic medicine flourishing? A survey of midcareer Ph.D. and physician investigators
- Linda H. Pololi, Arthur T. Evans, Janet T. Civian, Lisa A. Cooper, Brian K. Gibbs, Kacy Ninteau, Rada K. Dagher, Kimberly Bloom-Feshbach, Robert T. Brennan
-
- Journal:
- Journal of Clinical and Translational Science / Volume 7 / Issue 1 / 2023
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 17 April 2023, e105
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
Introduction:
Midcareer research faculty are a vital part of the advancement of science in U.S. medical schools, but there are troubling trends in recruitment, retention, and burnout rates.
Methods:The primary sampling frame for this online survey was recipients of a single R01 or equivalent and/or K-award from 2013 to 2019. Inclusion criteria were 3–14 years at a U.S. medical school and rank of associate professor or two or more years as assistant professor. Forty physician investigators and Ph.D. scientists volunteered for a faculty development program, and 106 were propensity-matched controls. Survey items covered self-efficacy in career, research, work-life; vitality/burnout; relationships, inclusion, trust; diversity; and intention to leave academic medicine.
Results:The majority (52%) reported receiving poor mentoring; 40% experienced high burnout and 41% low vitality, which, in turn, predicted leaving intention (P < 0.0005). Women were more likely to report high burnout (P = 0.01) and low self-efficacy managing work and personal life (P = 0.01) and to be seriously considering leaving academic medicine than men (P = 0.003). Mentoring quality (P < 0.0005) and poor relationships, inclusion, and trust (P < 0.0005) predicted leaving intention. Non-underrepresented men were very likely to report low identity self-awareness (65%) and valuing differences (24%) versus underrepresented men (25% and 0%; P < 0.0005). Ph.D.s had lower career advancement self-efficacy than M.D.s (P < .0005).
Conclusions:Midcareer Ph.D. and physician investigators faced significant career challenges. Experiences diverged by underrepresentation, gender, and degree. Poor quality mentoring was an issue for most. Effective mentoring could address the concerns of this vital component of the biomedical workforce.
Bacterial coinfections with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)
- Glen Huang, Daisuke Furukawa, Bryant D. Yang, Brian J. Kim, Arthur C. Jeng
-
- Journal:
- Antimicrobial Stewardship & Healthcare Epidemiology / Volume 1 / Issue 1 / 2021
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 10 November 2021, e45
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
Background:
The pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has dramatically increased cheshospitalizations, and it is often difficult to determine whether there is a bacterial or fungal coinfection at time of presentation. In this study, we sought to determine the rates of coinfection and utilization of antibiotics in SARS-CoV-2 disease.
Methods:Retrospective chart review of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 pneumonia from April 13, 2020, to July 14, 2020.
Results:In total, 277 patients were hospitalized for COVID-19 pneumonia during this period. Patients that received antibiotics within 48 hours of presentation were more likely to be febrile (59.3% vs 41.2%; P = .01) and to have leukocytosis (23.9% vs 5.9%; P < .01) and were less likely to have a procalcitonin level <0.25 ng/mL (58.8% vs 74.5%; P = .04). In total, 45 patients had positive blood cultures collected during hospitalization, 16 of which were clinically significant. Of the clinically significant blood cultures, 5 were collected <48 hours of admission. Moreover, 18 sputum cultures were clinically significant, 2 of which were collected within 48 hours of admission.
Conclusion:Bacterial and fungal coinfections in COVID-19 appear to be rare on presentation; thus, this factor may be a good target for enhanced antibiotic stewardship.
Preface
- Hilton L. Root, George Mason University, Virginia
-
- Book:
- Network Origins of the Global Economy
- Published online:
- 17 March 2020
- Print publication:
- 19 March 2020, pp xv-xviii
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
Consumer’s Guide to Regulatory Impact Analysis: Ten Tips for Being an Informed Policymaker
- Susan Dudley, Richard Belzer, Glenn Blomquist, Timothy Brennan, Christopher Carrigan, Joseph Cordes, Louis A. Cox, Arthur Fraas, John Graham, George Gray, James Hammitt, Kerry Krutilla, Peter Linquiti, Randall Lutter, Brian Mannix, Stuart Shapiro, Anne Smith, W. Kip Viscusi, Richard Zerbe
-
- Journal:
- Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis / Volume 8 / Issue 2 / Summer 2017
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 27 July 2017, pp. 187-204
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
Regulatory impact analyses (RIAs) weigh the benefits of regulations against the burdens they impose and are invaluable tools for informing decision makers. We offer 10 tips for nonspecialist policymakers and interested stakeholders who will be reading RIAs as consumers.
1. Core problem: Determine whether the RIA identifies the core problem (compelling public need) the regulation is intended to address.
2. Alternatives: Look for an objective, policy-neutral evaluation of the relative merits of reasonable alternatives.
3. Baseline: Check whether the RIA presents a reasonable “counterfactual” against which benefits and costs are measured.
4. Increments: Evaluate whether totals and averages obscure relevant distinctions and trade-offs.
5. Uncertainty: Recognize that all estimates involve uncertainty, and ask what effect key assumptions, data, and models have on those estimates.
6. Transparency: Look for transparency and objectivity of analytical inputs.
7. Benefits: Examine how projected benefits relate to stated objectives.
8. Costs: Understand what costs are included.
9. Distribution: Consider how benefits and costs are distributed.
10. Symmetrical treatment: Ensure that benefits and costs are presented symmetrically.
Aerobic and Cognitive Exercise (ACE) Pilot Study for Older Adults: Executive Function Improves with Cognitive Challenge While Exergaming
- Nicole Barcelos, Nikita Shah, Katherine Cohen, Michael J. Hogan, Eamon Mulkerrin, Paul J. Arciero, Brian D. Cohen, Arthur F. Kramer, Cay Anderson-Hanley
-
- Journal:
- Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society / Volume 21 / Issue 10 / November 2015
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 19 November 2015, pp. 768-779
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Dementia cases are increasing worldwide; thus, investigators seek to identify interventions that might prevent or ameliorate cognitive decline in later life. Extensive research confirms the benefits of physical exercise for brain health, yet only a fraction of older adults exercise regularly. Interactive mental and physical exercise, as in aerobic exergaming, not only motivates, but has also been found to yield cognitive benefit above and beyond traditional exercise. This pilot study sought to investigate whether greater cognitive challenge while exergaming would yield differential outcomes in executive function and generalize to everyday functioning. Sixty-four community based older adults (mean age=82) were randomly assigned to pedal a stationary bike, while interactively engaging on-screen with: (1) a low cognitive demand task (bike tour), or (2) a high cognitive demand task (video game). Executive function (indices from Trails, Stroop and Digit Span) was assessed before and after a single-bout and 3-month exercise intervention. Significant group × time interactions were found after a single-bout (Color Trails) and after 3 months of exergaming (Stroop; among 20 adherents). Those in the high cognitive demand group performed better than those in the low cognitive dose condition. Everyday function improved across both exercise conditions. Pilot data indicate that for older adults, cognitive benefit while exergaming increased concomitantly with higher doses of interactive mental challenge. (JINS, 2015, 21, 768–779)
Characterization of microstructure and property evolution in advanced cladding and duct: Materials exposed to high dose and elevated temperature
- Todd R. Allen, Djamel Kaoumi, Janelle P. Wharry, Zhijie Jiao, Cem Topbasi, Aaron Kohnert, Leland Barnard, Alicia Certain, Kevin G. Field, Gary S. Was, Dane L. Morgan, Arthur T. Motta, Brian D. Wirth, Y. Yang
-
- Journal:
- Journal of Materials Research / Volume 30 / Issue 9 / 14 May 2015
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 20 May 2015, pp. 1246-1274
- Print publication:
- 14 May 2015
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Designing materials for performance in high-radiation fields can be accelerated through a carefully chosen combination of advanced multiscale modeling paired with appropriate experimental validation. The studies reported in this work, the combined efforts of six universities working together as the Consortium on Cladding and Structural Materials, use that approach to focus on improving the scientific basis for the response of ferritic–martensitic steels to irradiation. A combination of modern modeling techniques with controlled experimentation has specifically focused on improving the understanding of radiation-induced segregation, precipitate formation and growth under radiation, the stability of oxide nanoclusters, and the development of dislocation networks under radiation. Experimental studies use both model and commercial alloys, irradiated with both ion beams and neutrons. Transmission electron microscopy and atom probe are combined with both first-principles and rate theory approaches to advance the understanding of ferritic–martensitic steels.
Contributors
-
- By Mitchell Aboulafia, Frederick Adams, Marilyn McCord Adams, Robert M. Adams, Laird Addis, James W. Allard, David Allison, William P. Alston, Karl Ameriks, C. Anthony Anderson, David Leech Anderson, Lanier Anderson, Roger Ariew, David Armstrong, Denis G. Arnold, E. J. Ashworth, Margaret Atherton, Robin Attfield, Bruce Aune, Edward Wilson Averill, Jody Azzouni, Kent Bach, Andrew Bailey, Lynne Rudder Baker, Thomas R. Baldwin, Jon Barwise, George Bealer, William Bechtel, Lawrence C. Becker, Mark A. Bedau, Ernst Behler, José A. Benardete, Ermanno Bencivenga, Jan Berg, Michael Bergmann, Robert L. Bernasconi, Sven Bernecker, Bernard Berofsky, Rod Bertolet, Charles J. Beyer, Christian Beyer, Joseph Bien, Joseph Bien, Peg Birmingham, Ivan Boh, James Bohman, Daniel Bonevac, Laurence BonJour, William J. Bouwsma, Raymond D. Bradley, Myles Brand, Richard B. Brandt, Michael E. Bratman, Stephen E. Braude, Daniel Breazeale, Angela Breitenbach, Jason Bridges, David O. Brink, Gordon G. Brittan, Justin Broackes, Dan W. Brock, Aaron Bronfman, Jeffrey E. Brower, Bartosz Brozek, Anthony Brueckner, Jeffrey Bub, Lara Buchak, Otavio Bueno, Ann E. Bumpus, Robert W. Burch, John Burgess, Arthur W. Burks, Panayot Butchvarov, Robert E. Butts, Marina Bykova, Patrick Byrne, David Carr, Noël Carroll, Edward S. Casey, Victor Caston, Victor Caston, Albert Casullo, Robert L. Causey, Alan K. L. Chan, Ruth Chang, Deen K. Chatterjee, Andrew Chignell, Roderick M. Chisholm, Kelly J. Clark, E. J. Coffman, Robin Collins, Brian P. Copenhaver, John Corcoran, John Cottingham, Roger Crisp, Frederick J. Crosson, Antonio S. Cua, Phillip D. Cummins, Martin Curd, Adam Cureton, Andrew Cutrofello, Stephen Darwall, Paul Sheldon Davies, Wayne A. Davis, Timothy Joseph Day, Claudio de Almeida, Mario De Caro, Mario De Caro, John Deigh, C. F. Delaney, Daniel C. Dennett, Michael R. DePaul, Michael Detlefsen, Daniel Trent Devereux, Philip E. Devine, John M. Dillon, Martin C. Dillon, Robert DiSalle, Mary Domski, Alan Donagan, Paul Draper, Fred Dretske, Mircea Dumitru, Wilhelm Dupré, Gerald Dworkin, John Earman, Ellery Eells, Catherine Z. Elgin, Berent Enç, Ronald P. Endicott, Edward Erwin, John Etchemendy, C. Stephen Evans, Susan L. Feagin, Solomon Feferman, Richard Feldman, Arthur Fine, Maurice A. Finocchiaro, William FitzPatrick, Richard E. Flathman, Gvozden Flego, Richard Foley, Graeme Forbes, Rainer Forst, Malcolm R. Forster, Daniel Fouke, Patrick Francken, Samuel Freeman, Elizabeth Fricker, Miranda Fricker, Michael Friedman, Michael Fuerstein, Richard A. Fumerton, Alan Gabbey, Pieranna Garavaso, Daniel Garber, Jorge L. A. Garcia, Robert K. Garcia, Don Garrett, Philip Gasper, Gerald Gaus, Berys Gaut, Bernard Gert, Roger F. Gibson, Cody Gilmore, Carl Ginet, Alan H. Goldman, Alvin I. Goldman, Alfonso Gömez-Lobo, Lenn E. Goodman, Robert M. Gordon, Stefan Gosepath, Jorge J. E. Gracia, Daniel W. Graham, George A. Graham, Peter J. Graham, Richard E. Grandy, I. Grattan-Guinness, John Greco, Philip T. Grier, Nicholas Griffin, Nicholas Griffin, David A. Griffiths, Paul J. Griffiths, Stephen R. Grimm, Charles L. Griswold, Charles B. Guignon, Pete A. Y. Gunter, Dimitri Gutas, Gary Gutting, Paul Guyer, Kwame Gyekye, Oscar A. Haac, Raul Hakli, Raul Hakli, Michael Hallett, Edward C. Halper, Jean Hampton, R. James Hankinson, K. R. Hanley, Russell Hardin, Robert M. Harnish, William Harper, David Harrah, Kevin Hart, Ali Hasan, William Hasker, John Haugeland, Roger Hausheer, William Heald, Peter Heath, Richard Heck, John F. Heil, Vincent F. Hendricks, Stephen Hetherington, Francis Heylighen, Kathleen Marie Higgins, Risto Hilpinen, Harold T. Hodes, Joshua Hoffman, Alan Holland, Robert L. Holmes, Richard Holton, Brad W. Hooker, Terence E. Horgan, Tamara Horowitz, Paul Horwich, Vittorio Hösle, Paul Hoβfeld, Daniel Howard-Snyder, Frances Howard-Snyder, Anne Hudson, Deal W. Hudson, Carl A. Huffman, David L. Hull, Patricia Huntington, Thomas Hurka, Paul Hurley, Rosalind Hursthouse, Guillermo Hurtado, Ronald E. Hustwit, Sarah Hutton, Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa, Harry A. Ide, David Ingram, Philip J. Ivanhoe, Alfred L. Ivry, Frank Jackson, Dale Jacquette, Joseph Jedwab, Richard Jeffrey, David Alan Johnson, Edward Johnson, Mark D. Jordan, Richard Joyce, Hwa Yol Jung, Robert Hillary Kane, Tomis Kapitan, Jacquelyn Ann K. Kegley, James A. Keller, Ralph Kennedy, Sergei Khoruzhii, Jaegwon Kim, Yersu Kim, Nathan L. King, Patricia Kitcher, Peter D. Klein, E. D. Klemke, Virginia Klenk, George L. Kline, Christian Klotz, Simo Knuuttila, Joseph J. Kockelmans, Konstantin Kolenda, Sebastian Tomasz Kołodziejczyk, Isaac Kramnick, Richard Kraut, Fred Kroon, Manfred Kuehn, Steven T. Kuhn, Henry E. Kyburg, John Lachs, Jennifer Lackey, Stephen E. Lahey, Andrea Lavazza, Thomas H. Leahey, Joo Heung Lee, Keith Lehrer, Dorothy Leland, Noah M. Lemos, Ernest LePore, Sarah-Jane Leslie, Isaac Levi, Andrew Levine, Alan E. Lewis, Daniel E. Little, Shu-hsien Liu, Shu-hsien Liu, Alan K. L. Chan, Brian Loar, Lawrence B. Lombard, John Longeway, Dominic McIver Lopes, Michael J. Loux, E. J. Lowe, Steven Luper, Eugene C. Luschei, William G. Lycan, David Lyons, David Macarthur, Danielle Macbeth, Scott MacDonald, Jacob L. Mackey, Louis H. Mackey, Penelope Mackie, Edward H. Madden, Penelope Maddy, G. B. Madison, Bernd Magnus, Pekka Mäkelä, Rudolf A. Makkreel, David Manley, William E. Mann (W.E.M.), Vladimir Marchenkov, Peter Markie, Jean-Pierre Marquis, Ausonio Marras, Mike W. Martin, A. P. Martinich, William L. McBride, David McCabe, Storrs McCall, Hugh J. McCann, Robert N. McCauley, John J. McDermott, Sarah McGrath, Ralph McInerny, Daniel J. McKaughan, Thomas McKay, Michael McKinsey, Brian P. McLaughlin, Ernan McMullin, Anthonie Meijers, Jack W. Meiland, William Jason Melanson, Alfred R. Mele, Joseph R. Mendola, Christopher Menzel, Michael J. Meyer, Christian B. Miller, David W. Miller, Peter Millican, Robert N. Minor, Phillip Mitsis, James A. Montmarquet, Michael S. Moore, Tim Moore, Benjamin Morison, Donald R. Morrison, Stephen J. Morse, Paul K. Moser, Alexander P. D. Mourelatos, Ian Mueller, James Bernard Murphy, Mark C. Murphy, Steven Nadler, Jan Narveson, Alan Nelson, Jerome Neu, Samuel Newlands, Kai Nielsen, Ilkka Niiniluoto, Carlos G. Noreña, Calvin G. Normore, David Fate Norton, Nikolaj Nottelmann, Donald Nute, David S. Oderberg, Steve Odin, Michael O’Rourke, Willard G. Oxtoby, Heinz Paetzold, George S. Pappas, Anthony J. Parel, Lydia Patton, R. P. Peerenboom, Francis Jeffry Pelletier, Adriaan T. Peperzak, Derk Pereboom, Jaroslav Peregrin, Glen Pettigrove, Philip Pettit, Edmund L. Pincoffs, Andrew Pinsent, Robert B. Pippin, Alvin Plantinga, Louis P. Pojman, Richard H. Popkin, John F. Post, Carl J. Posy, William J. Prior, Richard Purtill, Michael Quante, Philip L. Quinn, Philip L. Quinn, Elizabeth S. Radcliffe, Diana Raffman, Gerard Raulet, Stephen L. Read, Andrews Reath, Andrew Reisner, Nicholas Rescher, Henry S. Richardson, Robert C. Richardson, Thomas Ricketts, Wayne D. Riggs, Mark Roberts, Robert C. Roberts, Luke Robinson, Alexander Rosenberg, Gary Rosenkranz, Bernice Glatzer Rosenthal, Adina L. Roskies, William L. Rowe, T. M. Rudavsky, Michael Ruse, Bruce Russell, Lilly-Marlene Russow, Dan Ryder, R. M. Sainsbury, Joseph Salerno, Nathan Salmon, Wesley C. Salmon, Constantine Sandis, David H. Sanford, Marco Santambrogio, David Sapire, Ruth A. Saunders, Geoffrey Sayre-McCord, Charles Sayward, James P. Scanlan, Richard Schacht, Tamar Schapiro, Frederick F. Schmitt, Jerome B. Schneewind, Calvin O. Schrag, Alan D. Schrift, George F. Schumm, Jean-Loup Seban, David N. Sedley, Kenneth Seeskin, Krister Segerberg, Charlene Haddock Seigfried, Dennis M. Senchuk, James F. Sennett, William Lad Sessions, Stewart Shapiro, Tommie Shelby, Donald W. Sherburne, Christopher Shields, Roger A. Shiner, Sydney Shoemaker, Robert K. Shope, Kwong-loi Shun, Wilfried Sieg, A. John Simmons, Robert L. Simon, Marcus G. Singer, Georgette Sinkler, Walter Sinnott-Armstrong, Matti T. Sintonen, Lawrence Sklar, Brian Skyrms, Robert C. Sleigh, Michael Anthony Slote, Hans Sluga, Barry Smith, Michael Smith, Robin Smith, Robert Sokolowski, Robert C. Solomon, Marta Soniewicka, Philip Soper, Ernest Sosa, Nicholas Southwood, Paul Vincent Spade, T. L. S. Sprigge, Eric O. Springsted, George J. Stack, Rebecca Stangl, Jason Stanley, Florian Steinberger, Sören Stenlund, Christopher Stephens, James P. Sterba, Josef Stern, Matthias Steup, M. A. Stewart, Leopold Stubenberg, Edith Dudley Sulla, Frederick Suppe, Jere Paul Surber, David George Sussman, Sigrún Svavarsdóttir, Zeno G. Swijtink, Richard Swinburne, Charles C. Taliaferro, Robert B. Talisse, John Tasioulas, Paul Teller, Larry S. Temkin, Mark Textor, H. S. Thayer, Peter Thielke, Alan Thomas, Amie L. Thomasson, Katherine Thomson-Jones, Joshua C. Thurow, Vzalerie Tiberius, Terrence N. Tice, Paul Tidman, Mark C. Timmons, William Tolhurst, James E. Tomberlin, Rosemarie Tong, Lawrence Torcello, Kelly Trogdon, J. D. Trout, Robert E. Tully, Raimo Tuomela, John Turri, Martin M. Tweedale, Thomas Uebel, Jennifer Uleman, James Van Cleve, Harry van der Linden, Peter van Inwagen, Bryan W. Van Norden, René van Woudenberg, Donald Phillip Verene, Samantha Vice, Thomas Vinci, Donald Wayne Viney, Barbara Von Eckardt, Peter B. M. Vranas, Steven J. Wagner, William J. Wainwright, Paul E. Walker, Robert E. Wall, Craig Walton, Douglas Walton, Eric Watkins, Richard A. Watson, Michael V. Wedin, Rudolph H. Weingartner, Paul Weirich, Paul J. Weithman, Carl Wellman, Howard Wettstein, Samuel C. Wheeler, Stephen A. White, Jennifer Whiting, Edward R. Wierenga, Michael Williams, Fred Wilson, W. Kent Wilson, Kenneth P. Winkler, John F. Wippel, Jan Woleński, Allan B. Wolter, Nicholas P. Wolterstorff, Rega Wood, W. Jay Wood, Paul Woodruff, Alison Wylie, Gideon Yaffe, Takashi Yagisawa, Yutaka Yamamoto, Keith E. Yandell, Xiaomei Yang, Dean Zimmerman, Günter Zoller, Catherine Zuckert, Michael Zuckert, Jack A. Zupko (J.A.Z.)
- Edited by Robert Audi, University of Notre Dame, Indiana
-
- Book:
- The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy
- Published online:
- 05 August 2015
- Print publication:
- 27 April 2015, pp ix-xxx
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
Contributors
-
- By James P. Bednarz, William C. Carroll, Francis X. Connor, Trevor Cook, Gabriel Egan, Julia Griffin, Brean Hammond, Rui Carvalho Homem, Sujata Iyengar, Russell Jackson, Isabel Karremann, Arthur F. Kinney, Tina Krontiris, Barry Langston, Stephan Laqué, Dennis McCarthy, Ellen MacKay, Roderick H. McKeown, Sonia Massai, L. Monique Pittman, James Purkis, Carol Chillington Rutter, June Schlueter, Charlotte Scott, Will Sharpe, James Shaw, Simon Smith, B. J. Sokol, Stephen Spiess, Gary Taylor, Leslie Thomson, Sir Brian Vickers, William W. Weber
- Edited by Peter Holland, University of Notre Dame, Indiana
-
- Book:
- Shakespeare Survey
- Published online:
- 05 October 2014
- Print publication:
- 02 October 2014, pp vi-vi
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
Contributors
-
- By Arthur S. Abramson, Norhaida Aman, Virginie Attina, Sapna Bhat, B. Bhuvaneshwari, Denis Burnham, Brian Byrne, Hsin-Chin Chen, Shyamala K. Chengappa, Chris Davis, Jackson T. Gandour, Winston D. Goh, Thom Huebner, Lixian Jin, Jing Zhou, R. Malatesha Joshi, Benjawan Kasisopa, Jeesun Kim, Christine Kitamura, Ananthanarayan Krishnan, Lay Wah Lee, Elena Lieven, Sudaporn Luksaneeyanawin, Ramesh Mishra, Sonali Nag, Vishnu K. K. Nair, Loraine K. Obler, Tomasina Oh, Richard K. Olson, Prakash Padakannaya, Aparna Pandey, Avanthi Niranjan Paplikar, Shalmalee Pitale, Chaitra Rao, Theeraporn Ratitamkul, Nan Xu Rattanasone, Sunil Kumar Ravi, Rogayah A. Razak, Ronan Reilly, Susan Rickard Liow, Khazriyati Salehuddin, Stefan Samuelsson, Vaijayanthi M. Sarma, Yasuhiro Shirai, Shruti Sircar, John Song, Sabine Stoll, Lidia Suárez, Jennie Tran, Jie-Li Tsai, Kimiko Tsukada, Jyotsna Vaid, Heather Winskel, Janet Wright, Kelly Yeo
- Edited by Heather Winskel, Southern Cross University, Australia, Prakash Padakannaya, University of Mysore, India
-
- Book:
- South and Southeast Asian Psycholinguistics
- Published online:
- 05 December 2013
- Print publication:
- 28 November 2013, pp xvii-xx
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
Core Competencies for Disaster Medicine and Public Health
- Lauren Walsh, Italo Subbarao, Kristine Gebbie, Kenneth W. Schor, Jim Lyznicki, Kandra Strauss-Riggs, Arthur Cooper, Edbert B. Hsu, Richard V. King, John A. Mitas II, John Hick, Rebecca Zukowski, Brian A. Altman, Ruth Anne Steinbrecher, James J. James
-
- Journal:
- Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness / Volume 6 / Issue 1 / March 2012
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 08 April 2013, pp. 44-52
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Effective preparedness, response, and recovery from disasters require a well-planned, integrated effort with experienced professionals who can apply specialized knowledge and skills in critical situations. While some professionals are trained for this, others may lack the critical knowledge and experience needed to effectively perform under stressful disaster conditions. A set of clear, concise, and precise training standards that may be used to ensure workforce competency in such situations has been developed. The competency set has been defined by a broad and diverse set of leaders in the field and like-minded professionals through a series of Web-based surveys and expert working group meetings. The results may provide a useful starting point for delineating expected competency levels of health professionals in disaster medicine and public health.
(Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2012;6:44–52)
Chapter Fourteen - From genes to ecosystems
-
- By Joseph K. Bailey, Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Tennessee, Jennifer A. Schweitzer, Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Tennessee, Francisco Úbeda, Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Tennessee, Benjamin M. Fitzpatrick, Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Tennessee, Mark A. Genung, Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Tennessee, Clara C. Pregitzer, Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Tennessee, Matthew Zinkgraf, Department of Biological Sciences, Northern Arizona University, Thomas G. Whitham, Department of Biological Sciences, Northern Arizona University, Arthur Keith, Department of Biological Sciences, Northern Arizona University, Julianne M. O’Reilly-Wapstra, Bradley M. Potts, School of Plant Science, University of Tasmania, Brian J. Rehill, Department of Chemistry, US Naval Academy, Carri J. LeRoy, Environmental Studies Program, The Evergreen State College, Dylan G. Fischer, Environmental Studies Program, The Evergreen State College
- Edited by Glenn R. Iason, Marcel Dicke, Wageningen Universiteit, The Netherlands, Susan E. Hartley, University of York
-
- Book:
- The Ecology of Plant Secondary Metabolites
- Published online:
- 05 August 2012
- Print publication:
- 19 April 2012, pp 269-286
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Introduction
Relatively little is understood about the extent to which evolution in one species can result in changes to associated communities and ecosystems, the potential mechanisms responsible for those changes (genetic drift, gene flow or natural selection), the phenotypes or candidate genes that may link ecological and evolutionary dynamics, or the role of rapid evolution and feedbacks. However, linking genes and ecosystems in this manner is fundamental to placing community structure and ecosystem function in an evolutionary framework. This is not an easy endeavour as the field of community genetics is multi-disciplinary (Whitham et al., 2006), and ecological and evolutionary dynamics occur at different spatial and temporal scales. Recent reviews show that plant genetic variation can have extended consequences at the community and ecosystem level (extended phenotype; Whitham et al., 2003) affecting arthropod diversity, soil microbial communities, trophic interactions, carbon dynamics and soil nitrogen availability (Whitham et al., 2006; Johnson & Stinchcombe, 2007; Hughes et al., 2008; Bailey et al., 2009a). Its effects are not limited to single systems or even foundation species, but are common across broadly distributed plant and animal systems, and can have effects at the community and ecosystem level of similar magnitude to traditional ecological factors, such as differences among species (Bailey et al., 2009a, b).
Theory in the fields of community genetics (Shuster et al., 2006; Whitham et al., 2006) and co-evolution (Thompson, 2005) also supports the connection between evolutionary and ecological dynamics (Johnson et al., 2009). Multiple investigators argue that community and ecosystem phenotypes represent complex traits related to variation in the fitness consequences of inter-specific indirect genetic effects (IIGEs) (Thompson, 2005; Shuster et al., 2006; Whitham et al., 2006; Tetard-Jones et al., 2007). In their most basic form, IIGEs occur when the genotype of one individual affects the phenotype and fitness of an associated individual of a different species (Moore et al.,1997; Agrawal et al., 2001; Shuster et al., 2006; Wade, 2007). Such interactions are important in the geographic mosaic theory of co-evolution (Thompson, 2005), the development of community heritability (Shuster et al., 2006) and non-additive responses of community structure, biodiversity and ecosystem function (Bailey et al., 2009a). Empirical evidence for the effects of plant genetic variation on communities and ecosystems, paired with growing theoretical models explaining evolutionary mechanisms for these results, provides a solid foundation for understanding how evolutionary processes, such as drift and selection, may affect community structure and ecosystem function.
Notes on the contributors
-
- By Geoff Anderson, Gabrielle Appleby, Nicholas Aroney, Robin Boadway, Philip Bodman, Sir Gerard Brennan, A. J. Brown, Paul de Jersey, Alan Fenna, Thomas Fleiner, Robert French, Stephen Gageler, Brian Galligan, Jean-François Gaudreault-DesBiens, Arthur B. Gunlicks, Thomas O. Hueglin, Thomas John, John Kincaid, Cornelia Koch, Scott Prasser, Suri Ratnapala, Cheryl Saunders, Robert A. Schapiro, Alison Taylor, Greg Taylor, Anne Twomey, Margaret White, Augusto Zimmermann
- Edited by Gabrielle Appleby, University of Adelaide, Nicholas Aroney, University of Queensland, Thomas John
-
- Book:
- The Future of Australian Federalism
- Published online:
- 05 April 2012
- Print publication:
- 08 March 2012, pp viii-xiii
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
List of Illustrations
- Brian Arthur, University of Greenwich
-
- Book:
- How Britain Won the War of 1812
- Published by:
- Boydell & Brewer
- Published online:
- 05 February 2013
- Print publication:
- 17 November 2011, pp viii-viii
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
1 - CONVOYS AND BLOCKADES: The Evolution of Maritime Economic Warfare
- Brian Arthur, University of Greenwich
-
- Book:
- How Britain Won the War of 1812
- Published by:
- Boydell & Brewer
- Published online:
- 05 February 2013
- Print publication:
- 17 November 2011, pp 6-26
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Fleets employed to cover a coast, are not only precarious in their exertions, which depend much upon winds, but are miserably confined as to all the effects of naval war. Those effects are only felt when our fleets can keep the sea to protect our commerce and annoy that of our enemies, as well as to defend our distant possessions, and to cover descents and continued incursions.
(Wm Eden, MP, Commissioner for Conciliation with America, 1778–9)BY THE EARLY NINETEENTH CENTURY maritime blockade was the offensive arm of economic warfare, used against an enemy in conjunction with the convoy protection of a nation's own overseas trade. The term ‘offensive blockade’ was used to describe the interception of an enemy's merchant, transport or naval vessels, usually on their entering or leaving harbour. Defensive economic warfare involved the gathering of merchant vessels to sail as convoys under the armed protection of as many warships as could be spared. Belligerents with sufficient naval means were increasingly expected to impose a policy of ‘stop and search’ on all vessels found in specified areas, and those carrying goods ‘interdicted’ by proclamation as ‘contraband’ were at best turned back or, otherwise, detained. Crews and cargoes thought likely to benefit an enemy were either subject to an enforced sale or, subject to law, confiscated. At the beginning of each European war legislation was needed to legitimise what otherwise would have constituted piracy, a practice almost universally condemned but nonetheless still carried out in some parts of the world.
EPILOGUE
- Brian Arthur, University of Greenwich
-
- Book:
- How Britain Won the War of 1812
- Published by:
- Boydell & Brewer
- Published online:
- 05 February 2013
- Print publication:
- 17 November 2011, pp 209-209
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
THE TERMS OF THE TREATY OF GHENT made possible British re-use of the strategy of offensive and defensive economic warfare in further wars, and memories of the Royal Navy's past commercial and naval blockades and defensive convoys remained alive. The impact of the Royal Navy's blockades of the United States between 1812 and 1815, perhaps reinforced by those of Germany between 1914 and 1919 and in 1939, was such that they were recalled by some into living memory. During a tour of America in 1942, just after the United States' entry into the Second World War, the British Broadcasting Corporation's correspondent, Alistair Cooke, met an insurance broker in Hartford, Connecticut, who told him ‘Of course, some things we won't insure. Nobody in this country will insure any cargo that the British might consider contraband. The British Navy virtually controls the seas, and we can't insure against British capture.’
Hard feelings in some circles had evidently taken so long to diminish that the United States War Department's Instructions for American Servicemen in Britain, issued in 1942, mentioned the War of 1812 and cautioned that ‘… there is no time today to fight old wars over again, or bring up old grievances’. But there may be time enough to acknowledge that, for too long, the significance of the Royal Navy's blockades of the United States during the War of 1812 has been seriously under-estimated.
INTRODUCTION
- Brian Arthur, University of Greenwich
-
- Book:
- How Britain Won the War of 1812
- Published by:
- Boydell & Brewer
- Published online:
- 05 February 2013
- Print publication:
- 17 November 2011, pp 1-5
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
[T]he noiseless, steady, exhausting pressure with which sea power acts [was] cutting off the resources of the enemy while maintaining its own, supporting war in scenes in which it does not itself appear or appears only in the background, and striking blows only at rare intervals.
CAREFUL STUDY OF THE WAR OF 1812 between Britain and the United States began almost as soon as conflict ended in February 1815. Described then in America as a ‘second war of independence’, the war remains both important and controversial. From the outset, each study tended to concentrate on particular aspects of the war. In 1817 William James, a British lawyer-turned-historian, was meticulous in refuting some of the more extravagant contemporary American naval claims in his Full and Correct Account of the Chief Naval Occurrences of the Late War. Since then, almost every separate action has been minutely dissected and its naval and military significance analysed at length.
Alfred Mahan's Sea Power in its Relations to the War of 1812, published in Boston in 1905, also dealt in detail with the war's early single-ship actions, which caught the public imagination then and since. Mahan's description and evaluation of British maritime blockades against the United States was part of his argument in favour of ‘a naval force adequate to the protection of our commerce’. He attributed the bankruptcy of New England merchants to British maritime blockade, but stopped short of admitting the eventual insolvency of the American government.
Appendix B: Economic History Tables
- Brian Arthur, University of Greenwich
-
- Book:
- How Britain Won the War of 1812
- Published by:
- Boydell & Brewer
- Published online:
- 05 February 2013
- Print publication:
- 17 November 2011, pp 227-250
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
Bibliography
- Brian Arthur, University of Greenwich
-
- Book:
- How Britain Won the War of 1812
- Published by:
- Boydell & Brewer
- Published online:
- 05 February 2013
- Print publication:
- 17 November 2011, pp 305-318
-
- Chapter
- Export citation