Discussion questions Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words - 8

Discussion questions - Essay Example Managed health care refers to techniques or programs whose intention is to minimize unnecessary health care expenses. Managed health care include economic incentives for patients to select l affordable health care, control of length of stay and admission of inpatients, programs that evaluate the necessity of the provision of specific health care services, incentives for cost sharing for expensive and specialized services such as outpatient surgery, and forming health service provision contracts with selected health care providers (DeNisco & Barker, 2012). Behavioral modification has become an essential intervention technique in disease prevention and promotion of health care. Its intention is to strengthen or weaken a specific behavior with an aim of generating positive or negative consequences. The role of advanced nurses in behavioral modification includes identifying and modifying behavioral risk factors for health promotion and disease prevention through positive reinforcement, negative reinforcement or differential reinforcement. The appropriate use of acceptable interventions, cost effective procedures and materials, community friendly programs, and observable effects can assist an advanced nurse in achieving behavior modification at individual and community level. Therapeutic intervention by advanced nurses involves medical and non medical intervention. Alongside with other professions, advanced nurses are responsible for treatment, making follow up to ascertain whether patients are recovering, and non treatment interventions such as counseling (DeNisco & Barker, 2012). The government’s role in healthcare involves delivery of quality health care, financing of healthcare and regulation of both public and private health care services. The government has its own organizations that offer health care services. These organizations offer

The Stock Market Values Of Usec Finance Essay

The Stock Market Values Of Usec Finance Essay The report values the existing operations and future projects of USEC and analyses whether the stock market is significantly over or undervaluing the business. USEC is the worlds leading provider of enriched uranium to the commercial power plants with a 50% market share in the North America. The current share price fairly reflects the existing operations and future growth of those operations. However, there are two important valuation issues. Firstly, the company has initiated the American Centrifugal Project (ACP) which will use new technology. It would reduce costs and double the current capacity. The total capital investment is expected to be $1.7 billion and the plant is expected to start production in 2011. The NPV of the ACP is -$220 million implying that the share is overvalued significantly. Secondly, the company has a very high amount of uranium inventory and if its market value is included then the market is significantly undervaluing the liquidation value. However, the liquidation value is likely to be lower than the market value of inventory because it will be difficult to sell all inventories without resulting in sharp drop in uranium prices. Overall, considering the high risks involved in the ACP, the market price is higher than the true worth of the company and hence the trading strategy would be to short USEC. Introduction USEC is the worlds leading supplier of enriched uranium fuel for commercial nuclear power plants. This report analyses whether the company is over or undervalued and suggests an appropriate trading strategy. The USECs share price of $10.80 fairly reflects the expectations of the cash-flow potential of companys existing operations. However, there are two main issues that can result in USECs valuation being significantly different from its market valuation. Firstly, the company was in the initial stages of implementing the American Centrifuge Project (ACP) which will not only double the scale of the company but also significantly improve its competitive position. The usage of a new technology in the ACP will reduce electricity costs substantially, a major cost contributor in enriching Uranium. Secondly, as a result of USECs contract with the US government and the Department of Energy (DoE), the company has a high inventory of uranium acquired at a cost which is less than 50% of the current market price. This could give a potential valuation boost. The above-mentioned two points are analysed in detail to understand their potential impact on the valuation of the company. Finally, a trading recommendation is made on the basis of the above analysis. Company background USEC operates the only uranium-enrichment facility in the US, a diffusion plant in Paducah, Kentucky. Uranium fuel for nuclear power plant is sold as Separate Work Unit (SWU) and USEC uses, on average, one pound of uranium to produce one SWU. The capacity of the Paducah plant is 3.5 million SWU. USEC has another plant which is placed in cold standby under a contract with the DoE. USEC also provides contract and consulting services to the DoE. The company supplied 50% of enriched uranium fuel to commercial nuclear power plants in the North America. Its global market share was 30%. Its main competitors are AREVA/Eurodif, Tenex and Urenco. USECs revenues and net profit for the year ended 31 December 2005 were $1,559 million and $22 million respectively. Rationale for investing in the ACP The company has recently initiated the American Centrifuge Project (ACP). ACP is a major investment and will cost $1.7 billion. The company is pursuing the ACP due to the following factors. USECs operating costs are significantly high due to its usage of a technology that consumes more electricity for enriching uranium into SWU. The electricity costs of the company have risen recently because a long-term contract with a power supplier has expired. The operating profit margin declined from 5.2% in 2004 to 4.3% in 2005. The new technology at the ACP will reduce enrichment-process energy consumption costs by 95% and overall enrichment costs would be cut by 50%, relative to the existing process. This would allow the company to target higher profit margins and/or higher market share by positioning itself as a low-cost producer. US government has entered into the Megatons to Megawatts contract with the Russian government under which USEC is bound to purchase 5 million pounds of uranium each year from Russia. The Paducah plant can process only 3.5 million pounds of uranium per annum. The higher purchase than consumption over the years has resulted in an inventory of 29 million pounds of uranium. The capacity of the ACP is 6.5 million SWU per annum. The high capacity will reduce the existing inventory over time. One of companys competitors, URENCO, is planning a new plant in New Mexico. The ACP may deter URENCO from opening the new plant. USEC will also save $8m and $30m in lease and capital expenditure costs respectively annually by putting Paducah plant in cold standby once the ACP starts production. NPV of the ACP currently implied by the stock market The stock market implied NPV of the ACP can be deduced from the difference between the market value of USEC and the NPV of its existing business. The current share price of $10.80 fairly reflects the discounted cash flows of the existing operations as well as the future growth of those operations. This implies that the stock market is assigning no NPV to the ACP. In spite of the new technology reducing costs and inventory, and increasing sales, the stock market doesnt seem to think that the ACP will change the value of the company. This could be due to a number of reasons. Firstly, USEC already has a very high market share and it would be difficult for the company to significantly increase its market share with the near doubling of production capacity. Secondly, ACP will be the first commercialisation of a new technology and actual benefits in terms of energy savings may not meet the projected figures. Flyvbjerg et al. (2009, p. 172) state that projects underperform due to numerous uncertainties such as project complexity, technological uncertainty. This would reduce the NPV of the project. Thirdly, the plant is expected to cost $1.7 billion and take 4 years to build. Large-scale projects typically cost much higher than the initial estimates (Touran and Lopez, 2006, p. 853). The time required to complete the project may also exceed initial estimates and could end up further increasing the cost. This could have a severe impact on USECs financials as the company will have to pay interest on high borrowings. Finally, the company may not be able to recoup a large part of its investment if the things did not go to plan because of the specialist nature of ACPs assets (McLaney and Atrill, 2007, p. 510). USECs WACC The WACC formula is given below. WACC = Cost of debt*(1-Tax rate)*(Debt/(Debt+Equity)) + Expected return on equity*(Equity/(Debt+Equity)) The expected return on equity is calculated according to the Capital Asset Pricing Model (Pagano and Stout, 2004, p. 14). Expected return on equity = Risk-free rate + Beta*(Market risk premium) The risk-free rate is 5.04%, yield on the 10-year US Treasury bonds. USECs beta is 1.3 and the market risk premium is expected to be 5.5%. Substituting values in the above equation, Return on equity = 5.04% + 1.3*5.5% = 12.19% The current yield on the companys debt is 9.04% and this will be the cost of debt. The tax rate (tax / profit before tax) in 2005 was 40%. The amount of debt was $475 million on 31 December 2005. It is assumed that the amount of debt has not changed in July 2006. The share price is $10.80. The number of shares was 86.1 million which gives the company a market capitalisation of $930 million. Substituting values in the WACC equation, the WACC of USEC is 9.90%. This WACC will be used for discounting APC. However, there are key issues in doing this. It assumes that the APC will be funded with same gearing as the existing business. This would require a large amount of equity funding which is unlikely. The APC will most likely have a different gearing and hence, its WACC will be different. Using same WACC also assumes similar risk profile. However, this ignores two important points. Firstly, the company will be using a completely different and new technology and additional risk should be reflected in higher WACC or risk-adjusted cash flows (Genus and Coles, 2006, p. 116). Secondly, the risks associated with long construction period should also be taken into account. Additionally, Lobe (2009, p. 45) states that a constant WACC rate must fail if the implied leverage ratio is time varying. It would be difficult to maintain a constant leverage ratio as the operating profits will change the gearing in the later years. This implies that constant WACC based on current gearing is incorrect. In light of the above points, the WACC of the ACP is likely to be different than that of USEC. NPV of the ACP The NPV calculations are based on the following assumptions: Same capital structure as the existing operations. The debt required to fund the ACP will be $817 million based on the current gearing and remaining investment of $1.6 billion. SWU price in 2006 of $127 per unit. Uranium cost in 2006 of $43 per pound. 2006 enrichment cost of the ACP of $21 per SWU. Annual increases in SWU and enrichment cost at long-term inflation rate of 3%. Selling and general expenses at 4% of revenues, in line with 2005 figures. 1% of revenue paid as royalty to the DoE. Tax rate of 40%. Appendix I shows the sales and cost data used in projecting profit and loss of the ACP. Appendix II shows the profit and loss projections over the useful life of the ACP. Appendix III shows the NPV calculations of the ACP. The NPV is $597 million. After deducting debt of $817 million, the net value addition to equity holders will be -$220 million. The negative NPV to equity implies that the companys equity will be destroyed by the ACP and hence, the current market price is significantly overvalued. The NPV is based on a number of key factors including sales volume projections, sales price and cost per unit. The sensitivity of the NPV to key factors is analysed below. Sales projections The table below shows the sensitivity of the NPV to changes in sales units, expressed as percents of the base case. Table 1 Sensitivity to change in sales volume of SWU NPV decreases with reduction in sales volume. The highest NPV is -$220 million because the plant cannot produce more than 6.5 million SWU. Inflation rate The sales price of SWU, the cost of uranium and enrichment are assumed to grow at the inflation rate. The table below shows the sensitivity of the NPV to changes in the inflation rate. The NPV is positive at inflation rate of 4.5% or higher. Table 2 Sensitivity to change in the inflation rate WACC The WACC is based on a number of assumptions and the actual WACC is likely to be higher because of additional risks in this projects. The table below shows the sensitivity of the NPV to changes in the WACC. Table 3 Sensitivity to change in the WACC The negative NPV means that the project is value destroying. However, higher production will help the company release a large amount of its working capital and reduce debt early. That could be the reason behind markets implied nil value of the ACP. Liquidation valuation USEC has a large amount of uranium inventory. The balance sheet values inventory at its cost price of $20 per pound. The current market price of uranium is $43 per pound. The more than double market price can have a significant impact on the value of the company if its business is liquidated immediately. The assets liquidation value per share based on the book value of uranium inventory is $5.1, which is 51% lower than the current market price. The assets liquidation value per share on the basis of market value of uranium is $13.1, which is 22% more than the market value. There are two important issues associated with the liquidation valuation if market value of uranium is used. Firstly, the amount of uranium held by the company is much more than the global annual requirement from the commercial nuclear power plants and it would be a major struggle to even sell a significant amount of uranium immediately. Secondly, the oversupply due to 29 million pounds will result in significant fall in the price of uranium. It is more likely that the company will realise a lot less than the market value if uranium stock is liquidated immediately and hence, market value of uranium should not be taken into account for the liquidation analysis. Conclusion The current share price fairly reflects the existing operations and future growth of those operations. However, there are two important and contrasting valuation issues. Firstly, the company has initiated the American Centrifugal Project (ACP) which will use new technology. The NPV of the ACP is -$220 million which implies that the share is overvalued significantly. Also, there are additional risks due to new technology and higher amount of funding. Secondly, the company has a very high amount of uranium inventory and if its market value is included then the stock market is significantly undervaluing USEC if the business is liquidated immediately. However, it is unlikely that the market price of uranium will be achieved if the firm is liquidated because the high inventory will result in a sharp drop in uranium prices. Overall, the company is facing higher operational costs and its reliance on the ACP to increase value is risky with a negative NPV. Costs and time overruns in implementing the project could severely impact the financial health of USEC. The investment strategy would be to short USEC as negatives of the ACP overweigh its positives, at least until the time the ACP becomes operational. Exhibit I Sales and cost data of the ACP Exhibit II Profit and loss of the ACP Exhibit III NPV of the ACP

Containment Of Communism Essay -- Communism Essays

The Cold War is the closest the world has ever come to complete destruction. In this period of time, two world super powers were in a stalemate economically and militarily and were constantly competing to be the superior. The Cold War started as result of World War II, the United States and the Soviet Union had some differences on their perspectives of the world. United States being the richest country in the world promoted democracy and capitalism in the world. The newly formed Soviet Union thought that communism was a better political system because it transformed their economy and status in the world from nothing but a declining empire to a super power once again. The Cold War was a long series of events in which the communist tried to spread their ideas of government and socialist economy, known as expansionism, and the United States and some of the other Western powers such as Great Britain tried to contain it. Containment, a term introduced by George F. Kennan, was the foreign policy the United States practiced from 1946 to 1991 when the Soviet Union collapsed. The United States saw the Soviet Union to be a direct threat to the free world. During president Truman and Eisenhower’s administration the policy of containment evolved so drastically that American presidents would put anything on the line, including world peace. It started with the Truman Doctrine (1947) that stated the United States would help any country financially and militarily that was interested in keeping the world free for democracy. The Truman Doctrine came about as direct result of communist guerillas in Greece trying to take over the government. American advisers believed that the guerillas were taking orders from the Soviets after they launched a civil war against the government. The United States decided to assist the standing government in Greece because they believed it would have a large impact on Europe and most importantly Turkey that was having its own problems with communism and was strategically located next to large oil reserves of Iran. Congress approved $300 million to aid Greece and $100 million in food and military expenses to aid Turkey. The second large step in containment was the Marshall Plan. Proposed by Secretary of State George Marshall, it would provide economic relief to rebuilding Western European nations such as Great Britain, France, Belgium and even... ...ed to nationalize the Suez Canal through which three fourths of all European oil is passed. After several months of negotiations Britain, France and Israel attacked Egypt and retook the canal. United Nations condemned their actions and forced them to give up the canal to Egypt once again. As a result of the Eisenhower convinced Congress to approve the Eisenhower Doctrine that would â€Å"assist any nation in the region that required aid against aggression from any nation controlled by International Communism.† The Eisenhower administration was very careful not to alienate any Middle Eastern countries that could provide the country with a steady supply of oil and this affected his foreign policy and the policy of containment. During the Truman and Eisenhower administration a policy of containment served to save the free world from communism. But at times these two administrations put world peace on the line to prove its superiority as a nation. One cannot judge these events to being wrong or right because values of a nation and people change with time, we can just learn from these events and know that the next time United States has a contest of superiority it could cost us the world.

There Is a Conflict Between Science and Religion

There is a conflict between science and religion. To begin with there is the Galileo Controversy. Furthermore there is the issue of the use of In Vitro Fertilization (IVF). A third point is about how the universe was created. These three points clearly shows that there is a conflict between science and religion. To begin with there is the Galileo Controversy. Galileo was an Italian astronomer. He was the first man who suggested that the earth is actually the one which revolve around the sun and not the sun revolve around the earth which is what the people from the church believed at that time. When news about his theory was heard by the church they immediately told him to stop spreading his theory to other people because the people from the church interpreted that the bible said that the earth is the centre of the universe and it is in fix position and Galileo`s theory is contradicting with the bible. When he refuse to give up his theory he was placed under house arrest for the rest of his life. Furthermore there is the issue on the use of IVF. Science had found ways in which can help women to get pregnant that is through IVF. I must stress that my religion have no objection in using science to help sick people but using IVF is a different matter. Just the thought of a women getting pregnant by a man`s sperm, who is not her husband, disgust me not to mention it is against my principals, against my beliefs and above all It is against my religion. The reason why they can not get pregnant in the first place is because God did not want them to get pregnant and using IVF in against god`s wishes. Who are we to go and against God wishes? A third point is about how the universe was created. According to science the universe once was just a small space then it quickly expand when a huge explosion happened this is known as the Big Bang and it took 13 billion years for the universe to become what it is now. This is different from what my religion said. According to my religion when God wanted to make the universe he only need to say it and the universe was created instantly. These three points clearly shows that there is a conflict between science and religion. The fact that there is the Galileo Controversy, the fact that the use of IVF which is against God`s wishes and the fact that there is a contradicting explanation about how the universe was created. With this in mind it is clearly to conclude that there is a conflict between science and religion.

Difference Between Religion and Spirituality

This paper draws from six published works that deal with psychological and scholarly research on religion and spirituality. The works vary in their definitions and use of the concepts and terminology of religion and spirituality. Hood et al. (2009) suggest that that social scientists have traditionally been able to make a distinction between religion and spirituality in their research. However, other psychologists contend that the definitions overlap. Therefore, the conceptual and operational definitions have been inconsistently used. This paper examines Hood et al. 2009) research in relationship to other works to suggest that a definitive definition of religion and spirituality should be developed and agreed upon to advance the science of religion. Keywords: religion, spirituality In order to explore the differences between religion and spirituality one must attempt to define these terms. However, religion and spirituality are complex concepts not easily or definitively definable; a t least not universally. Their meanings have changed over the course of time. At times they have been used synonymously. Yet, at other times religion and spirituality are considered distinct concepts having no overlap.A Study on Religion and the Role of It on People and Media†¦. Furthermore, religion and spirituality are sometimes viewed as if one encompasses the other. It seems to simply be a matter of opinion; who is defining religion, when and for what purpose. To compound this quandary, social Science research suggests that lay people, religious and psychological educators and researchers define religion and spirituality inconsistently. This makes it particularly difficult for the scientific world to even compare research findings on religion and or spirituality. Religion and spirituality are complex and diverse cultural phenomenon. Hood, Hill, and Spilka (2009), stated â€Å"†¦what one person is sure to call religious may be far removed from another person’s understanding, especially when we begin to analyze religion across traditions and cultures† (p. 7). Western societies (especially in the United States) in the not too distant past, typically define religion as an institutionalized set of beliefs and rituals about God that is experienced and or practiced collectively. Conversely, other regions of the world (including eastern Asia) may define religion as encompassing multiple Gods or even no Gods (e. . ungodly supernatural entities) (Hood, et al. , 2009). Hood et al. , (2009) contend that Americans now use the term spirituality in place of religion. Nelson (2009), agrees with Hood et al. , that spirituality has become a synonym for religion. According to Nelson (2009), religion traditionally referred to all aspects of a human’s search for and relationship to a divine or transcendent (something greater than ourselves). Using the terminology of religion and spirituality interchangeably may be common practice but it doesn’t mean that they mean the same things. Like religion, spirituality has been defined in a myriad of ways. In ancient times spirituality was associated with the Hebrew Christian traditions (Ottaway, 2003). Through the 19th century spirituality was often considered to be synonymous with spiritualism. Spiritualism referred to contact with spirits, the supernatural, and psychic phenomena (Nelson, 2009). Hence, spirituality was considered negatively up until the 21st century. According to Nelson (2009), presently â€Å"the term is often used to denote the experiential and personal side of our relationship to the transcendent or sacred† (p. ). Nelson suggests that the people who use this definition tend to view religion as a distinct narrow concept. They typically define religion as â€Å"the organizational structures, practices, and beliefs of a religious group†, (Nelson, 2009, p. 8). The rise in popularity of spirituality in the last two decades has exaggerated the distinction and or lack of distinction between r eligion and spirituality. Whereas, some modern Americans use the terms interchangeably, others (especially those who abhor mainstream religions and all they are associated with) do not. The latter group might prefer to say that they are â€Å"spiritual but not religious†, (Zinnbauer, et al. , 1997). Conversely, people who unknowingly embrace Epstein’s (1993, 1994) Cognitive-Experiential Self-Theory (CEST) may view spirituality and religion as distinct concepts that are nonetheless related (Hill, 1999). I believe that religion and spirituality can be two distinct concepts but that currently the line between the two is too blurry to be able to distinguish one from the other. One could experience religion without experiencing spirituality (e. g. teenager forced to attend church but merely going through the motions). On the other hand, one could also experience spirituality (e. g. a sense of â€Å"awe† in the presence of nature or enlightenment during meditation) in the absence of religion. Additionally, one could experience both spirituality and religion in the context of the other. For example, one could meditate communally with others in an insti tutional setting (typical of a religious experience) and experience spirituality. Another example is that one could attend church (typical of a religious experience) and meditate individually during the church service. At this point in time, religion and spirituality overlap in a plethora of ways. Each can have a reverence to a God, Gods, or a higher supernatural power or powers. Likewise, religion and spirituality can each have private, public, personal, communal, conscious, unconscious, tangible, intangible, subjective and objective components to them. One difference between spirituality and religion is that â€Å"spirituality does not require an institutional framework†, (Hood, et al, 2009, p. 11). Another difference is that religion does not require communal practices (e. g. an elderly invalid can religiously pray at home). My views on religion and spirituality are that of a layperson and an aspiring psychologist and are indubitably confusing. However, my view doesn’t seem to differ substantially from others (laypersons, religious professionals and scholars, and social science professionals and researchers), as a finite definition for religion or spirituality is nonexistent (Zinnbauer et al. , 2010; Hood et al. , 2009, Nelson, 2009). According to Hood et al. (2009), a traditional distinction exists between religion and spirituality in the research literature, therefore the two terms are not used synonymously. Hood et al. (2009) explains that spirituality is viewed as personal and psychological, while religion is viewed as institutional and sociological. Basically, Hood et al. (2009), contends that religion is steeped in tradition and institution, whereas, spirituality has to do with a person’s personal beliefs, values and behaviors. This definition seems to be consistent with how religion and spirituality were defined between the 19th and 21st centuries. However, it should be noted, that Hood et al. 2009) also, later state that â€Å"in fact it is safe to say that even we three authors of this text do not fully agree with each other about the meaning of these terms† (p. 11). To compound matters, other psychologists suggest that religion and spirituality are used inconsistently in the research literature. Zinnbauer et al, (1997) argue that although social scientists have attempted to define, study, and theorize about religion and spirituality, they have done so inconsistently . â€Å"Still, the ways in which the words are conceptualized an used are often inconsistent in the research literature† (p. 549). According to Bender (2007) religion has been associated with a formal or institutional system and expression of belief and practices that is corporate, public, and conscious in scholarly studies. Conversely, spirituality has been defined as individual, private and unconscious, (Bender, 2007). Due to the inconsistencies in the definitions and use of religion and spirituality a pilot study was conducted to ascertain how religious professionals defined and evaluated religion and spirituality. The 2006 study conducted by Corine Hyman and Paul Handal at Saint Louis University in Missouri included Imans, Ministers, Priests, and Rabbis. These religious experts were asked to conceptually define religion and spirituality and to identify if there were any overlaps between the two. The study findings indicate that there were overlaps between the two concepts. However, religion was defined in a traditional sense of objective, institutional and ritualistic and spirituality was defined as subjective, internal and divine or transcendent (Hyman & Handal , 2006). Another study, this time conducted at the Maryland University, attempted to discern how lay people define religion and spirituality and how they make distinctions between the two. The participants in this study consisted of sixty-seven adults aged 61 to 93 who lived in three different retirement communities (Schlehofer, Omoto, A. M. , Adelman, 2008). The research findings indicate that the participants were better able to define religion concretely, than they were able to define spirituality. â€Å"In fact, some participants were not able to define spirituality at all†, (Schlehofer et al. , 2008). The afore mentioned studies illustrate that defining religion and spirituality is an ongoing task and not easily surmountable. This of course, makes the task of operationally defining religion and spirituality even harder. According to Bender (2007), spirituality is typically measured by asking questions about psychological well-being, experience, and self-identification; while religion is measured by questions about activities and doctrine. Although, many operational definitions have been developed and used to measure religion and spirituality, how does one actually know what one is measuring if the thing(s) that one is measuring is not clearly defined? CONCLUSIONS and Future Study: Ergo, in order to try to understand how religion and or spirituality affect all aspects of a person’s life, it is prudent for the scientific community to agree on what it is that they are actually researching. Once, the terms are defined and agreed upon, then they can operationally define each term. Only then, can psychologists more confidently conduct research and analysis to understand the true effects of religion and spirituality and make comparisons about those findings.ReferencesBender, C. (2007). Religion and Spirituality: History, Discourse, Measurement. Retrieved from http://religion.ssrc.org/reforum/Bender.pdf   Hill, P. C. (1999). Giving religion away: What the study of religion offers psychology. The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 94(4), 229-249. Hood, R. W., Hill, P. C., Spilka, B. (2009). The Psychology of Religion, 2, 7-11. Hyman, C., & Handal, P. J. (2006). Definitions and evaluation of religion and spiritua lity items by religious professionals: A pilot study. Journal of Religion and Health, 45(2), 264-282. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10943-006-9015-zNelson, J. M. (2009). Psychology, Religion, and Spirituality. Introduction to Psychology, Religion, and Spirituality. Retrieved from http://ucelinks.cdlib.org:8888/sfx_local/img/sfxmenu/dl_logo_1024.png Schlehofer, M. M., Omoto, A. M. and Adelman, J. R. (2008). How do â€Å"religion† and â€Å"spirituality† differ? Lay Defintions among Older Adults. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 47: 411-425. Zinnbauer, B. J., Pargament, K. I., Cole, B., Rye, M.S., Butter, E. M., Belavich, T.G., Hipp, K. M., Scott, A. B., Kadar, J. L. (1997). Religion and Spirituality: Unfuzzing the Fuzzy. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 36 (4). Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1387689