Search results

This paper examined the significance of the built environment for shaping inclusion and social connections in housing with care (HwC) schemes for older people (50+ years) in England and Wales. The purpose of this study was to develop a better understanding of how the availability, absence and use of communal spaces impacts social connections with other residents within HwC schemes.

Longitudinal and cross-sectional qualitative interviews were conducted with 72 residents across three HwC providers in England and Wales. Data were analysed using a thematic framework approach to examine how residents experienced their living environments.

Whilst the presence of communal shared spaces helps facilitate social connections and the development of friendships, full and equal access to these spaces remains challenging for residents with minority characteristics, and/or physical impairments. Building designers need to ensure they are complying with building regulations and the Equalities Act. The presence of on-site staff may also help to manage the impact of discriminatory attitudes.

A key strength of this study is its design, both in using longitudinal and cross-sectional interviews and in recruiting respondents with marginalised characteristics, whose voices have often been excluded in gerontological research. Another strength, albeit unexpected, is that this study was able to capture perspectives across the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. The pandemic, however, may also have generated some limitations in this study. COVID-19 restrictions limited the ability to engage face-to-face within housing schemes whose residents were predominantly from different ethnic minoritised groups, and it therefore limits the inclusion of the voices and experiences of these groups. Responses in later interviews may also have been influenced by the changes in social engagement stimulated by lockdowns and may only be specific to the context of the pandemic. However, the findings reported here focus on the role and use of the built environment, and much of the interview content would feasibly apply regardless of the pandemic.

This research offers some key insights and implications for housing providers and policy. Housing providers and architects must ensure that the design of HwC schemes affords all residents access to every area of the built environment to maintain independence, autonomy and to adopt the ethos of the ageing in place agenda. If communal areas are to function as “third” or social spaces – if they are to remain equally accessible to all members of the community – then building providers must ensure that all areas are accessible to all residents in line with building regulations and the Equality Act (2010).

Housing staff need to balance the natural development of friendship groups with the potential of the formation of exclusionary “cliques” within HwC schemes. Such cliques threaten the accomplishment of communal areas as “third” or social spaces and, as such, impact the quality of life for residents.

This study offers insights into how built environments support the development of social connections and friendships in HwC schemes. It also identifies ways that housing managers can ensure that all residents feel equally valued and included.

In a time of fake news, misinformation, and disinformation, critical thinking has become the most important skill for discerning false, incomplete, and outdated information and communication online. The study examines the effects of personal (gender, age, ethnicity, religiosity, and Big Five personality traits) and positional inequalities (education, occupational status, language proficiency) on critical thinking digital skills (CTDS) among generations X, Y, and Z.

An online survey was conducted among 1,495 Israeli Jews between the ages of 18 and 57, belonging to the X, Y, and Z generations.

The findings show that CTDS among Gen X were significantly lower, by a large margin, than those of the younger generations, while Gen Z reported the highest level of these skills. Multivariate analysis indicated different effect patterns of personal and positional categorical variables on CTDS. We found that the contribution of personal demographic inequalities (gender, age, ethnicity and religiosity) to the explained variance in CTDS was most pronounced in Gen Y, compared to Gen X and Gen Z. The contribution of Big Five personality traits and positional social inequalities (education, occupational status and language proficiency) to explaining CTDS was similar between Gen X and Gen Y, but much less pronounced among Gen Z.

Understanding the intergenerational differences in CTDS is crucial for tailoring educational approaches, promoting inclusivity, and harnessing the diverse strengths of each generation to navigate an ever-evolving digital landscape successfully.

First of its kind, this study combines Generational Cohort Theory with Resources and Appropriation Theory to identify which inequalities may hinder the acquisition of one of today’s most vital skills among three generations.

The shift in policy discourse towards individualism is affecting service provision and access, which has become increasingly conditioned on individual agency and the “deservingness” of the recipient. Gendered and intersectional experiences of homelessness and excluded populations less likely to be living on the streets remain overlooked and unaddressed. This study thus aims to uncover what drives “invisibility” in services for women experiencing multiple disadvantage and the gendered constraints the women are facing when exiting and navigating multiple disadvantage.

The paper draws on in-depth interviews with women who face severe and multiple disadvantage and their support staff. Data is also gathered through survey data and observations with a wide range of frontline service providers, as well as support notes and numerical progress data recorded by one of the service providers.

Contradicting the common assumption that people act as rational actors in their interaction with services, the author found that women’s decisions to (dis)engage may be blinded by forces of multiple disadvantage and mistrust. These are often developed as a result of systemic and gendered constraints that limit women’s capabilities and exercise of choice. Barriers in service access often amplified the personal barriers they were facing and reinforced women’s decisions to not engage with services.

The author hopes that this paper sheds light on the particular set of barriers women with multiple disadvantage face, which will be vital to reach women who face severe disadvantage and provide more effective policies, care and support.

This study gives voice to a particular hidden population: women with multiple disadvantage. It contributes to existing frameworks on agency and choice by understanding gendered barriers behind service engagement and how services themselves may be contributing to women’s invisibility.