|
 |
Funding Information
Agencies, Search Resources, & Internal
Fund Guidelines |
|
 |
Proposal Preparation
Standard Rates & Information, FastLane,
Grantwriting Resources, Abstracts of Funded WFU
Research |
|
 |
Award Administration
FAS, Federal Policies, Where to go for
help, |
|
 |
Human Subjects/IRB
Log in to eIRB
|
 |
Compliance
Management
IRB, RCR, ACUC, Biosafety |
 |
Policies & Procedures
|
|
 |
Office Information
Staff, Addresses, Publications, Events, & Internal
Deadlines |
|
|
ECONOMICS
Jac C. Heckleman
-
Delegate Voting at the Constitutional Convention
Awarded $29,536 for the period 2/2/10 to 2/28/11
Source: National Science Foundation (NSF)/University of Georgia
History, law, economics, and political science scholars have extensively studied the Constitutional Convention, but few hypotheses about delegate voting behavior and preferences have been evaluated empirically, primarily because only state votes were recorded. This project aims to recover individual delegate votes from statements made in debate coupled with attendance records, state-level votes, and the formal rule that a majority of its delegates determined a state’s vote. Estimates will be used to test three hypotheses: 1) whether delegates were influenced by their economic interests (the Beard thesis); 2) whether the Great Compromise altered delegate preferences; and 3) whether a few key delegates were persuaded to change their positions. Results will inform theories about representation, the constitutional process, and development of institutions, and legal interpretations of original intent. If the framers voted according to the interests they were supposed to represent, then deliberative settings may be adequate for constitutional reform. However, if they voted to promote their own economic interests, or their preferences were contingent on the adoption of major institutions, referenda or other forms of direct democracy may be better for constitutional reform.
- American Founding: Motivation of the Framers at the Constitutional
Convention
Awarded $27,777 for the period 9/1/04 to 6/30/05
Source: NSF
This project seeks to determine the motivation of the framers of
the US Constitution and framers generally. For the last century, scholars
have debated the motives of delegates to the 1789 Constitutional Convention.
Some argue that they voted according to their personal economic
interests (McGuire and Ohsfeldt 1986; McGuire 2003; Beard 1913); others,
that they voted according to national interests or political ideologies
(Brown 1956; Wood 1969; Roche 1961; Diamond 1981). If framers vote
according to the interests that they are supposed to represent, then
deliberative settings like constitutional conventions may be adequate
for reform. However, if they vote to promote their own interest or
that of a constituency, then referenda or other forms of direct democracy
will be needed.
The project will expand current understandings of the constitutional
convention in three ways. First, using state roll call votes, letters,
debate notes, speeches, and newspaper submissions that were unavailable
when McDonald (1958) originally inferred 16 delegate voting patterns,
it should at least double the data. Second, it will test more precisely
Beard's thesis and theories about ideology and rational self-interest.
Third, it will analyze the types of constituent interests that may
have affected voting behavior: who elected delegates to the convention,
who the delegates allegedly represented, and who might elect delegates
to future posts. Results will have important implications for political science,
economics, and law.
Michael Lawlor
- with Jeff Katula, HEALTH & EXERCISE SCIENCE
Healthy Living Partnership to Prevent Diabetes (HELP PDII)
Awarded $44,034 for the period 8/1/11 to 7/31/12
Source: National Institutes of Health (NIH)/Wake Forest Baptist Health (WFBH)
The Diabetes Prevention Program demonstrated that weight loss achieved through physical activity and diet was more effective in preventing type-2 diabetes mellitus than a pharmacologic intervention; however, translation into the community has lagged. The HELP PD trial randomized 300 overweight or obese people with prediabetes to usual care or a group-based lifestyle intervention facilitated by community health workers and staff at a Diabetes Care Center. To date, recruitment, retention, intervention, and assessment have been excellent, and 6-month weight loss averaged 6.4%. This competitive renewal tests the long-term glucose-lowering effects of the HELP PD intervention by randomizing the lifestyle intervention group to continued group maintenance or self-directed maintenance and following the usual care group for comparison.
- Look AHEAD
Awarded $22,150 for the period 5/1/08 to 4/30/09
Source: NIH
Look AHEAD is a longitudinal weight-loss trial for obese and overweight subjects, focusing on cardiovascular events. Dr. Lawlor serves as one of 7 Co-Principal Investigators on the Economic Committee, charged with estimating the cost and cost-effectiveness of this large, randomized, multisite national study, which will continue until 2011.
|