8 results
18 - Ethical issues in the meaningful involvement of service users as co-researchers
- Edited by Kristel Driessens, Karel de Grote Hogeschool Antwerpen, Belgium, Vicky Lyssens-Danneboom, Karel de Grote Hogeschool Antwerpen, Belgium
-
- Book:
- Involving Service Users in Social Work Education, Research and Policy
- Published by:
- Bristol University Press
- Published online:
- 13 May 2022
- Print publication:
- 06 December 2021, pp 209-223
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Introduction
This chapter seeks to identify and discuss ethical issues in the meaningful involvement of service users as co-researchers. Just because a researcher says that they are involving service users as co-researchers, it does not follow that this is how it is experienced by service users. It is also worth stating that I believe such involvement of service users will not only enhance the quality of the research but is more likely to lead to better outcomes for service users. While there is a growing evidence base for this (Brady, 2020; Lovell-Norton et al, 2020; Moulam et al, 2020), there are also examples of when such research set out with good intentions but became unstuck as the partnership between service users, practitioners and academics broke down (Natland, 2020).
All researchers, including service user co-researchers, possess a moral perspective about what is right and what is wrong. These views may be influenced by their life experiences and interactions with others, resulting in individualised moral beliefs set within a socio-historical context. While there is large amount of agreement about what is right and wrong, and in social work we would particularly point to principles like human rights and social justice, the application of such principles in particular situations is both contested and contestable. This chapter begins by identifying key ethical research frameworks, and then considers potential ethical issues that can arise during the research process.
Ethical perspectives in research
Contemporary discussions on research ethics usually begin with the trial of Nazi doctors after the Second World War that led to the Nuremberg Code (1947), which identified ten ethical key principles including consent and avoidance of risk to research participants. However, the mere existence of ethical codes has not prevented further examples of unethical research. One of the best known of these is the Tuskegee Syphilis Study of 1932–1972 (Brandt, 1978), wherein 400 African American men were not treated for syphilis even though a treatment was available. Instead, they were studied over a prolonged period to track the progression of the disease. More recently, in the UK, there was also the removal and retention of human tissue, including children's organs, for research at the Alder Hey Hospital (Redfern, 2001) without the parent's consent.
Twelve - Social work academia and policy in the United Kingdom
- Edited by John Gal, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Idit Weiss-Gal, Tel Aviv University
-
- Book:
- Where Academia and Policy Meet
- Published by:
- Bristol University Press
- Published online:
- 05 April 2022
- Print publication:
- 29 March 2017, pp 201-220
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
This chapter seeks to explore how social work academics in the four nations of the UK (England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales) influence social policy. The chapter identifies the contested context in which United Kingdom (UK) social work academics work and then explores the results of a survey on their involvement in social policy. From this it is identified that while they view one of their key academic roles as influencing social policy this has proven more difficult in practice and that there are issues with their self-efficacy and university support for this type of activity. The chapter ends with the introduction of ‘impact’ into the UK Research Excellence Framework and is hopeful that this might help lead to a greater involvement of social work academics in promoting social policy and being supported by their universities.
The context
The Central Council for Education and Training in Social Work was set up in 1971 to oversee the first generic UK social work education qualification, the Certificate in Qualification in Social Work. This initiative followed the Seebohm Report (1968), which established single local authority social work departments bringing together mental health, adults and children's work. The certificate was developed and replaced by other social work qualifications until 2003 when a minimum qualification at bachelor's and master's degree level was established. This depended on whether or not a potential student had a first degree in a related discipline, for example sociology or psychology. By this time, a new regulator, the General Social Care Council, had replaced the Central Council. This move firmly located social work education in the university sector. Social work was also becoming less UK-based and more four-nation orientated following public votes in favour of devolution held in 1997 in Scotland and Wales, and a year later in Northern Ireland. These votes led to the creation of the Scottish Parliament, the National Assembly for Wales and the Northern Ireland Assembly. Devolution has been applied in different ways in each nation due to historical and administrative differences with the UK government retaining ‘reserved powers’ including economic policy, foreign affairs and defence.
In 2006 Peter Connolly, a 17 month old baby, died in the London Borough of Haringey, sparking a review of social practice and education even before the new arrangements had had time to settle in.
Lorraine Green and Karen Clarke (2016), Social Policy for Social Work, Cambridge: Policy Press, £17.99, pp. 240, pbk.
- HUGH MCLAUGHLIN
-
- Journal:
- Journal of Social Policy / Volume 46 / Issue 2 / April 2017
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 16 January 2017, pp. 419-420
- Print publication:
- April 2017
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- HTML
- Export citation
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
eleven - Alternative futures for service user involvement in research
- Edited by Patsy Staddon, University of Plymouth
-
- Book:
- Mental Health Service Users in Research
- Published by:
- Bristol University Press
- Published online:
- 03 February 2022
- Print publication:
- 12 June 2013, pp 153-170
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Introduction
This chapter will seek to raise the reader's awareness of the often taken-for-granted assumptions about the future for service user researchers. In particular, it is not assumed that there is only one potential future, but many, all of which have their own implications for both service user researchers and non-service user researchers. The chapter will begin by identifying what we mean by a service user, identifying some of the strengths and limitations of this concept, and the notion of participatory research, before highlighting the way service users have been involved in research, the differing claims made for types of service user researchers and concluding by examining potential futures for service user researchers.
It is important to state from the very beginning that I am a supporter of service user involvement in research. I firmly believe that we have traditionally missed out on an important aspect of research's potential and impoverished our understanding of research's meaning and effectiveness by failing to actively involve service users in the research process concerning issues that directly affect them.
What does it mean to be a service user?
The notion of a service user is at first a social construction that attempts to define an identity and a relationship between those who commission or provide services and those who are the recipients of those services. It is important to note that the terms ‘service user’ and ‘service provider’ are not neutral entities and, as McDonald (2006, p 115) has rightly observed:
The words we use to describe those who use our services are, at one level, metaphors that indicate how we conceive them. At another level such labels operate discursively constructing both the relationship and the attendant identities of people participating in the relationship including very practical and material outcomes.
The term ‘service user’ was an attempt to acknowledge that those who were in receipt of welfare services had a right to have a say in the services they received or wished to receive. This new relationship sought to challenge the previous use of such terms as ‘client’, ‘consumer’, ‘customer’, ‘expert by experience’ or ‘patient’, all of which McLaughlin (2009b) has shown to be seriously flawed and signify different types of relationships and power differentials between professionals and those they seek to serve.
The B'Active programme for overweight primary school children in Glasgow: determining the prevalence of overweight and obesity and piloting an activity intervention
- Adrienne R. Hughes, Ruth McLaughlin, Jane Mckay, Kevin Lafferty, Tony McKay, Nanette Mutrie
-
- Journal:
- British Journal of Nutrition / Volume 97 / Issue 1 / January 2007
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 01 January 2007, pp. 204-209
- Print publication:
- January 2007
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of overweight and obesity in primary school children in Glasgow and to evaluate a pilot activity programme for overweight and obese children. BMI was measured in 1548 children. Overweight, obesity and severe obesity were defined as BMI ≥ 85th, 95th and 98th centile, respectively. Overweight and obese children were then invited to participate in a 10-week school-based activity programme. The programme was evaluated by recording weekly attendance, intensity (using the Children's Effort Rating Scale) and enjoyment (scale 1–10). Focus groups were used to explore the experiences and views of the children, teachers, coaches and parents. Of the 1548 children, 31·4 % were overweight, 19·1 % were obese and 12·4 % were severely obese; 38 % of those invited attended the activity programme. Weekly programme attendance was 83 % (range 56–99 %). Mean enjoyment rating (scale 1–10) was 8 for boys and 9 for girls. The intensity of activity sessions were rated ‘very easy’ by boys and ‘just feeling a strain’ by girls. Common themes emerging from the focus groups related to perceived positive and negative aspects of the programme (fun, concerns about stigmatising children); physical and psychological outcomes (fitter, more confident); and future recommendations (involve parents). In summary, the prevalence of overweight and obesity was high. The activity programme was successful in terms of attendance and enjoyment, and overall views of the initiative were positive and there was compelling support for its continuation.
ten - ‘Together we’ll crack it’: partnership and the governance of crime prevention
- Edited by Caroline Glendinning, Martin Powell, Kirstein Rummery
-
- Book:
- Partnerships, New Labour and the Governance of Welfare
- Published by:
- Bristol University Press
- Published online:
- 20 January 2022
- Print publication:
- 03 July 2002, pp 149-166
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
The emergent discourse of partnership in post-war crime control
Until the 1990s, anyone looking for a post-war history of crime prevention in the UK would, for the most part, have been forced to read about it in the margins and footnotes of texts on policing, courts and penalty. Traditionally, ‘crime prevention’ was deemed to be either the obvious, self-evident outcome of formal processes of criminal justice – the apprehension, prosecution, sentencing, punishment and reform of offenders – or ‘unfocused’ preventive activities associated with government-sponsored publicity campaigns about house and vehicle security (Gilling, 1997). Within the criminal justice system, the police had front-line responsibility for preventing crime, most obviously through law enforcement and the apprehension and prosecution of criminals.
With the publication of the report by the Cornish Committee in 1965, the case was presented for police forces to appoint specialist officers to encourage a more ‘scientific’ approach to crime prevention (Home Office, 1965). It was recommended that these officers should build and maintain relationships with private and public sector organisations to impress upon them the importance of taking responsibility for preventing crime. The Home Office Standing Committee on Crime Prevention was established in 1967 to coordinate national and regional crime prevention publicity. However, Weatheritt's overview of the status of crime prevention within the police in post-war Britain concluded that:
Crime prevention has not become part of mainstream policing and the specialist crime prevention service has been left to languish in something of a policing backwater. There is evidence that a lot of specialist crime prevention work fails to make an impact. The arrangements for identifying and disseminating ‘good practice’ within the police service are rudimentary. Whatever the expressed commitment of senior officers and successive governments to the view that prevention is the primary object of policing, the crime prevention job remains an activity performed on the sidelines while the main action takes place elsewhere. (Weatheritt, 1986, p 49)
In the wake of such criticisms, the beginnings of a partnership model of crime prevention can be discerned in the Home Office's Review of criminal justice policy, published in 1976 (cited in Gladstone, 1980).
Abstract: A Portfolio Model for Identifying Banks Operating under Capital Constraints
- Willard T. Carleton, Hugh S. McLaughlin
-
- Journal:
- Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis / Volume 12 / Issue 4 / November 1977
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 19 October 2009, p. 643
- Print publication:
- November 1977
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
The paper presents evidence suggesting that banks with very low and very high capital positions respond to interest rate changes differently from other banks. The concept of a capital constraint is introduced to explain this phenomenon. The hypothesis is that banks with a binding capital constraint should exhibit different asset management decisions from those banks which are unconstrained. The regression results indicate that low-capital banks for the years 1973-74 and 1974-75 did not respond to earnings in an economic fashion.