The development of national prejudice, in-group favouritism and self-stereotypes in British children

This study explores the development of national prejudice, ingroup favouritism and self-stereotyping in a sample of 329 British children. The aim was to test the prediction, derived from self-categorization theory (Oakes, Haslam & Turner, 1994; Spears & Haslam, 1997) and in opposition to cognitive-developmental theory (Aboud, 1988), that the supposed limited cognitive ability of young children to engage in individuated perception will not necessarily result in intergroup discrimination and self-stereotyping. The children were presented with a photograph evaluation task and some open-ended questioning. It was found that national prejudice, ingroup favouritism or self-stereotyping developed only in children aged over ten years and was not evident in young children. These findings question the validity of the cognitive-developmental approach which contends that intergroup discrimination and stereotyping are a product of information processing biases in young children. The apparent contradiction between the findings of this study and previous research on ethnic prejudice development is discussed in terms of the potential importance of groups norms in determining the willingness of people to express national prejudice and ingroup favouritism

Did the UK Digital Design and Technology (DD&T) programme lead to innovative curriculum change within secondary schools?

Design and technology (D&T) requires teachers to continually update their knowledge and skills, with regard to new technologies, appropriate to the needs of the time (Design and Technology Association, 2011). In 2011, Ofsted identified the need for “England to keep pace with global technological change” (Ofsted 2011, p.5), in the report ‘Meeting technological challenges, a survey of schools from 2007-2010’. Following the report, the UK government funded a national programme called Digital Design and Technology (DD&T). The programme set up a network of regional support centres to provide up-to-date Professional Development (PD) courses on modern D&T subject knowledge

A new social-cognitive developmental perspective on prejudice: The interplay between morality and group identity.

We argue that prejudice should be investigated in the context of social-cognitive development and the interplay between morality and group identity. Our new perspective examines how children consider group identity (and group norms) along with their developing moral beliefs about fairness and justice. This is achieved by developing an integrated framework drawing on developmental and social psychological theories of prejudice. This synthesis results in a perspective which provides a more contextualized analysis of prejudice development than previously offered by developmental theories. We describe research which supports our view that social norms, intergroup contact and perceived out-group threat affect the relative weight children place on moral and group-based criteria during the development of prejudice

Changing children’s intergroup attitudes towards refugees: Testing different models of extended contact

The present research evaluated an intervention, derived from the "extended contact hypothesis," which aimed to change children's intergroup attitudes toward refugees. The study (n=253) tested 3 models of extended contact among 5- to 11-year-old children: dual identity, common ingroup identity, and decategorization. Children read friendship stories based upon these models featuring in- and outgroup members. Outgroup attitudes were significantly more positive in the extended contact conditions, compared with the control, and this was mediated by "inclusion of other in self." The dual identity intervention was the most effective extended contact model at improving outgroup attitudes. The effect of condition on outgroup intended behavior was moderated by subgroup identity. Implications for theoretically based prejudice-reduction interventions among children are discussed

Measuring access: how accurate are patient-reported waiting times?

Introduction: A national audit of waiting times in England’s genitourinary medicine clinics measures patient access. Data are collected by patient questionnaires, which rely upon patients’ recollection of first contact with health services, often several days previously. The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of patient-reported waiting times. Methods: Data on true waiting times were collected at the time of patient booking over a three-week period and compared with patient-reported data collected upon clinic attendance. Factors contributing to patient inaccuracy were explored. Results: Of 341 patients providing initial data, 255 attended; 207 as appointments and 48 ‘walk-in’. The accuracy of patient-reported waiting times overall was 52% (133/255). 85% of patients (216/255) correctly identified themselves as seen within or outside of 48 hours. 17% of patients (17/103) seen within 48 hours reported a longer waiting period, whereas 20% of patients (22/108) reporting waits under 48 hours were seen outside that period. Men were more likely to overestimate their waiting time (10.4% versus 3.1% p<0.02). The sensitivity of patient-completed questionnaires as a tool for assessing waiting times of less than 48 hours was 83.5%. The specificity and positive predictive value were 85.5% and 79.6%, respectively. Conclusion: The overall accuracy of patient reported waiting times was poor. Although nearly one in six patients misclassified themselves as being seen within or outside of 48 hours, given the under and overreporting rates observed, the overall impact on Health Protection Agency waiting time data is likely to be limited