What’s in it for us? An introduction to Public and Patient Involvement from the public’s perspective
Sign up for the new RKEDF online interactive workshop to find out about getting the public involved with your research.
Date:Tuesday 19 October 11-12:30pm
This short workshop offers an engaging introduction to the what, why and how of public involvement in research. It is co-designed and facilitated by Rachel Jury and Tim Worner who have extensive experience of sharing their lived experience expertise in research studies, Dr Mel Hughes, Academic Lead for the BU PIER (Public Involvement in Education and Research) Partnership and Angela Warren, PIER involvement coordinator. The workshop will cover the different approaches to public involvement; the public contributor role; the benefits of public involvement and what pitfalls to avoid.
The workshop will also provide an opportunity for researchers to learn about public involvement and to consider this from the perspective of experts by experience and in relation to their own research. This will be an interactive workshop with opportunities for researchers to share and discuss ideas and plans.
What is public involvement in research?
Public involvement in research means research that is done ‘with’ or ‘by’ the public, not ‘to’, ‘about’ or ‘for’ them. It means that patients or other people with relevant experience contribute to how research is designed, conducted and disseminated.
Intended learning outcomes of this session
Develop knowledge and understanding of different models of public involvement
Consider the benefits of public involvement for a research study and all those involved
Identify best practice in designing and conducting public involvement in research
Who is this session aimed at?
Researchers at any career stage or level who are actively considering or developing a public involvement strategy for their own research or wish to find out more.
• Individuals or teams whose educational research work has shown demonstrable public engagement or impact
• Practitioners or researchers whose work is grounded in educational research and has led to demonstrable public engagement or impact
• Those whose activities have boosted public engagement with educational research or its impact, or whose efforts have increased recognition and support for education research in public
Two awards, worth £500 each are available. One is given to an individual’s research and the other for a team of researchers. The winners will also have a featured article in BERA’s magazine.
This award is designed to support early-career researchers who show exceptional talent in both research and public engagement, emphasising and demonstrating the importance of academic research and creative thought at a time of rapid political and societal change.
The British Academy, in collaboration with the Wolfson Foundation emphasises the importance of award-holders communicating their plans and results to a broad audience. It is expected that six awards will be offered and that they will continue to participate with future cohorts building a network of outstanding researchers.
Funding
The grant maximum is £130,000 across three years. Awards can be used flexibly: at least £90,000 for time buy out, and up to £40,000 for research and travel expenses and dissemination of findings.
The funding is expected to be divided:
First, to buy out time of the academic duties of the award-holder in order to focus on their research goals.
Secondly, for travel and public engagement across the three years of the award to help with research costs and to undertake dissemination of the findings from the fellowship research locally, nationally and globally.
Eligibility
Applicants must have a full-time or part-time permanent or fixed term post that covers the length of the award (three years) at a UK university or other research institution, such as a museum or gallery, which can provide a suitable environment and support for applicants.
Applicants should have research, teaching and other related duties from which they would need to be released from in order to heighten their focus on the research and engagement supported through the fellowship.
Applicants should be within seven years of completion of their doctorate, though applications are also welcome from those researchers who have taken time out since the completion of their PhD for maternity/paternity/adoption leave, for caring responsibilities or for periods of illness.
Applications are welcome from museums and galleries, including but not necessarily limited to those with Independent Research Organisation (IRO) status.
At BU we promote and celebrate the work done to engage public audiences with BU research.
The public engagement with research team in Research Development and Support (RDS) can help promote your event to relevant audiences through our regular newsletter and social media channels. It also helps us to stay informed on the public engagement work being carried out by BU.
Please note: we are keen to promote BU public engagement with research activity wherever possible, but completing this form does not guarantee that we will be able to promote your event. To be considered for inclusion, your event or activity must be;
Focused on BU research, either solely or as part of a wider programme.
Events or activities that do not involve BU research, such as marketing or recruitment events, will not be accepted.
Intended for and open to non-academic audiences, either entirely or as a portion of the audience.
Submitted, at the latest, in the first two weeks of the month preceding the event.
For example, an event taking place in June should be submitted via the form any time before 14 May. This is due to lead times on producing and sending the newsletter.
Event descriptions may be edited for consistency in style with other content. If you have any questions about this process, please contact us.
Dr Sue Thomas shares her experience of presenting at a BU Café Scientifique event on 6 July 2021.
For my talk at Café Scientifique I took a fresh look at the topic of my 2017 book “Nature and Wellbeing in the Digital Age: How to feel better without logging off”, which has new relevance in the age of digital wellbeing during COVID-19. This continued the theme of my previous book, “Technobiophilia: Nature and Cyberspace”, which looked at the prevalence online of nature-derived metaphors and imagery, and which I discussed at Café Sci in 2013.
My talk topic – Technobiophilia
Intuitively we all know that Nature is good for us. Research has backed that up, showing that contact with nature can support emotional wellbeing and better concentration, as well as reduce stress and lower heart rate and blood pressure. Sometimes even simple psychological connectedness to nature can produce the same effects.
Biophilia is a hypothesized hidden programme which runs in the background of our lives. The term was first coined by Erich Fromm but became more popular when the eminent biologist EO Wilson described it as “the innate attraction to life and lifelike processes”. Wilson believes that biophilia may have the ability to lie dormant for periods of time until something triggers it into action again.
The notion of biophilia led to my own definition of ‘technobiophilia’ as “the innate attraction to life and lifelike processes as they appear in technology”. Technobiophilia connects our lives in nature with our lives in the digital, and this process has been very evident during the Covid-19 Lockdowns. Here are some examples:
In October 2020, the Metro newspaper declared that “Nature documentaries are ‘perfect lockdown viewing and make people happier’ in an article about the TV programme “Seven Worlds, One Planet” which highlighted the story of the last two northern white rhinoceros left alive on the planet.
On Instagram, thousands of RSPB #breakfastbirdwatch watchers shared their photos. Sussex_sara posted “Is anyone else feeling in a state of suspended animation these days? 😕 Living alone, the only tangible sense I have of days passing are the changes in nature as our lives are put on hold.”
Country Life magazine, perhaps not the most techie of periodicals, listed the best live animal webcams to get you through lockdown. Their Top 3 were: Little penguins, Phillip Island Nature Parks, Australia; Folly Farm, Pembrokeshire (sheep, goats, newborn lambs) and Edinburgh Zoo (Panda cam, Penguin Cam, Koala Cam and Lion Cam)
The BBC launched a collaboration to bring virtual soundscapes of music and nature directly to audiences with Radio 3, 6 Music, and BBC Sounds, and also embarked on The Virtual Nature Experiment with The University of Exeter, a ground-breaking study exploring how virtual experiences of nature might impact wellbeing.
Nintendo relaunched its old online game “Animal Crossing” and it was soon dubbed ‘the game of the pandemic’. Slate Magazine said “Animal Crossers new and old found comfort in exerting control over their islands’ virtual terrain as the world outside grew more and more chaotic” and the MIT Technology Review reported that “Gentle, comforting games like Nintendo’s latest hit are perfect escapist entertainment, but they’re also helping us to connect in these strange times.”
This last observation was born out by a study conducted before the pandemic and published in 2020, which reported a significant increase of feelings of connectedness to the community after watching digital nature. Interestingly, they also found that tended nature scenes elicited more social aspirations than wild nature scenes.
In 2020, Natural England surveyed the changing relationship with nature during lockdown. It reported that 41% of people said that visiting natural spaces had become even more important to them than before. Also in 2020, in a study conducted before the pandemic, the University of Exeter found that the best way of delivering virtual nature for improving mood was computer-generated virtual reality, which proved more effective than high definition TV or 360° video.
During the lockdown pause, Nature was busy regenerating. As early as April 2020, carbon dioxide and nitrogen dioxide fell by up to 40%. Air traffic fell 50%. UK road traffic fell 70%. And during that year, wildlife came closer – wild goats wandered the empty streets of Llandudno, coyotes walked across the Golden Gate Bridge, there were deer in Washington DC, and wild boar in Spain and Italy. Everyone heard more bird song. By April 2021, marine noise pollution had decreased so much that the seas had become measurably quieter.
So, what has lockdown taught us about digital nature and wellbeing? It seems that we have learned that we can connect with nature in many different ways, both physically and digitally. We have been reminded that we can live more of our lives outdoors, and that nature can help connect our local communities.
But individual nature connection is not enough. Covid has taught (some of us) to better connect with nature, but has that process sedated us? Distracted us? Separated us even more from what else is happening? This year, floods and fires around the world have reminded us that there are other disasters too, most of them a result of the global warming.
While we in the First World are busy self-soothing with nature, many millions of people have no access to vaccines. In January 2021, Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus WHO Director-General, warned “The world is on the brink of a catastrophic moral failure – and the price of this failure will be paid with lives and livelihoods in the world’s poorest countries.”
Of course, this moral failure can be seen in the climate emergency too. In his 2020 film ‘A Life on Our Planet’ David Attenborough delivered his Witness Statement and told the story of ‘our greatest mistake’. The film begins and ends in Chernobyl which, although still devoid of humans, has seen the return of many thriving animals and plants. This allows Attenborough to make his final message one of hope. ‘We have’, he says, ‘the opportunity to become a species in balance with nature’.
When my book ‘Technobiophilia: Nature and Cyberspace’ was published in 2013, some thought the idea of using technology to connect with nature was contradictory, even harmful. But the last 18 months of the pandemic have shown the benefits of nature in the digital age, for some of us at least. But there is much more work to do. Perhaps digital nature can play a part in helping humanity to finally, to quote Attenborough, “become a species in balance with nature” – if there is time.
My Café Scientifique experience
I enjoyed my second Café Scientifique session. It went very well and was followed by a lot of positive feedback and a lively exchange of ideas, which brought the July lecture to a successful conclusion, slightly over the scheduled two hours.
The audience asked some excellent questions and we were pleasantly able to deepen our exchanges. It was interesting to hear from those providing opportunities for engaging with digital nature, especially Radio Lento https://radiolento.podbean.com/ who produce entrancing virtual nature tours in the form of weekly sound postcards from beautiful places. Find them on Twitter @RadioLento where they regularly share some wonderful sounds. There was a lively exchange of views about the relative values of visual, audio, VR and analogue nature experiences, especially when created from the same sources.
It was a great experience with people from all over the world, including old friends. My talk was recorded and is available to watch on the Café Sci YouTube channel. I hope that it inspires you to think and act on the relationship between nature, digital nature and our well-being.
At Café Scientifique, you can explore the latest ideas in science and technology in a relaxed online setting. Enjoy listening to a short talk before engaging in debate and discussion with our guest speaker and audience.
We’ll be joined by Dr Ashok Patnaikon Tuesday 5 October from 7.00pm until 8.30pm.
The COVID-19 pandemic has worsened children’s mental health, which was already in decline. Researchers have observed increased levels of anxiety, depression and other psychological distress. However, children with poor mental health do not always receive the support they need from schools and mental health services.
Stormbreak is a new programme that combines simple, fun movements with well-being techniques such as talking therapies and mindfulness, to help children care for their mental health. Join us to discover what happened when Stormbreak was trialled in several local schools, and where it could go next.
We are delighted to announce the publication of Olympic and Paralympic Analysis 2020: Mega events, media, and the politics of sport
Edited by Daniel Jackson, Alina Bernstein, Michael Butterworth, Younghan Cho, Danielle Sarver Coombs, Michael Devlin and Chuka Onwumechili
Featuring 114 contributors from leading academics from around the world – including several from BU staff and PGR students – this publication captures the immediate thoughts, reflections, and insights from the 2020 Olympic and Paralympic Games from the cutting edge of sport, communication and media research.
Published in the wake of the Tokyo 2020 Games, these contributions are short and accessible. Authors provide authoritative analysis of the Olympics and Paralympics, including research findings and new theoretical insights. Contributions come from a rich array of disciplinary influences, including media, communication studies, cultural studies, sociology, political science, and psychology.
1. The typhoon games (Toby Miller) 2. A green Olympic legacy for future generations? (Brett Hutchins and Ben Glasson) 3. The rise of critical consciousness in Japan: An intangible and unintended legacy of the Tokyo 2020 Olympic Games (Koji Kobayashi) 4. Host city and mega-events: Olympic legacy in Japan (John Horne) 5. Lessons from Tokyo: the impact of the Paralympics in Japan (Dennis J. Frost) 6. Let’s play! Inspiring an inclusive mindset with a hands-on Paralympic experience for children and teenagers in Japan (Olga Kolotouchkina and Carmen Llorente-Barroso) 7. The Olympic & Paralympic sponsorship without category exclusivity: Background of sponsorship exclusivity in Olympic and Paralympic Games (OPG) (Shintaro Sato) 8. Power sharing: Olympic sponsorship and the athlete’s personal brand (Bettina Cornwell) 9. What happened to Rule 40 at Tokyo 2020? (John Grady) 10. The Olympic Games and ambush marketing via social media (Gashaw Abeza) 11. The soft power of the Olympics in the age of Covid 19 (J. Simon Rofe) 12. Tokyo 2020 Olympic Games, nationalism, identity and soft power (Gayle McPherson and Solomon Ilevbare) 13. Tokyo 2020, East Asian geopolitics and Olympic diplomacy (Jung Woo Lee) 14. Cultural programming at Tokyo 2020: the impossible Olympic festival city? (Beatriz Garcia) 15. Anti-sex beds? Fake news! : why this video went massively viral? (Maki Hirayama) 16. Counting cases, counting medals: Containing the Olympic contagion during the Tokyo Games (Courtney M. Cox) 17. Public relations as the key in the 2020 Tokyo Olympic and Paralympic Games (Argyro Elisavet Manoli and Sungkyung Kim) 18. The Tokyo 2020 Organizing Committee’s veil of effective public relations to help save itself and the start of the Games (Karen Hartman) 19. Environmental leadership showcased in the Olympic Games (Brian P. McCullough) 20. Simone Biles and prioritizing athlete well-being (Kathleen Bachynski) 21. Pride and burden of striving for perfection at the Olympics (Wycliffe Njonorai) 22. Deliver a medal or apologize: A daunting task imposed on Japanese Olympians (Hatsuko Itaya)
Section 2: Media Coverage & Representation
23. What place is this? Tokyo’s made-for-television Olympics (David Rowe) 24. How do we truly interpret the Tokyo Olympic ratings? (Andrew C. Billings) 25. ‘A Games like no other’: The demise of FTA live Olympic sport? (Raymond Boyle) 26. The fleeting nature of an Olympic meme: Virality and IOC TV rights (Merryn Sherwood) 27. Tokyo 2021: the TV Olympics (Peter English) 28. The Olympic Channel: insights on its distinctive role in Tokyo 2020 (Xavier Ramon) 29. Reshaping the Olympics media coverage through innovation (José Luis Rojas Torrijos) 30. Temporality of emotionalizing athletes (Sae Oshima) 31. New Olympic sports: the mediatization of action sports through the Olympic Games 2020 Tokyo (Thomas Horky) 32. Media wins medal for coverage of athletes as people, instead of entertainers (Ryan Broussard) 33. Reporting at a distance. Stricter working conditions and demands on sports journalists during the Olympics (Jana Wiske) 34. Nigeria: Olympic Games a mystery for rural dwellers in Lagos (Unwana Akpan) 35. Tokyo 2020: A look through the screen of Brazilian television (William Douglas de Almeida and Katia Rubio) 36. Equestrian sports in media through hundred Olympic years. A roundtrip from focus to shade and back again? (Susanna Hedenborg and Aage Radmann) 37. An Olympic utopia: separating politics and sport. Primary notes after analyzing the opening ceremony media coverage of mainstream Spanish sport newspapers (Xavier Ginesta) 38. “Everything seemed very complicated”: Journalist experiences of covering the Tokyo 2020 Paralympic Games (Veronika Mackova) 39. “A ceremony for television”: the Tokyo 2020 media ritual (Andressa Fontes Guimarães-Mataruna, Adriano Lopes de Souza, Renan Petersen-Wagner, Doiara Silva dos Santos, Leonardo José Mataruna-Dos-Santos and Otávio Guimarães Tavares da Silva) 40. The paradox of the parade of nations: A South Korean network’s coverage of the opening ceremony at the 2020 Tokyo Olympics (Ji-Hyun Ahn) 41. Simone Biles, journalistic authority, and the ideology of sports news (Michael Mirer) 42. Representing high performance: Brazilian sports journalists and mass communication professionals discuss their philosophies on producing progressive Paralympic coverage (Fernanda Silva and John Watson) 43. How digital content creators are shaping meanings about world class para-athletes (Carolyn Jackson-Brown) 44. Is the Paralympic Games a second-class event? (Tatiane Hilgemberg) 45. Representations of gender in media coverage of the Tokyo 2020 Paralympic Games (Toni Bruce) 46. Reshaping the superhuman to the super ordinary: Observations on the Tokyo 2021 Paralympic games through Australian broadcasting coverage (Simon Darcy and Tracey J. Dickson) 47. Super heroes among us: A brief discussion of using the superhero genre to promote Paralympic Games and athletes (Cody T. Havard) 48. ”Unity in Diversity” – The varying media representations of female Olympic athletes (Riikka Turtiainen) 49. Why we need to see the “ugly” in women’s sports (Erin Whiteside) 50. Twitter conversations on Indian female athletes in Tokyo (Kulveen Trehan) 51. Between sexualization and de-sexualization: the representation of female athletes in Tokyo 2020 (Jörg-Uwe Nieland) 52. Megan Rapinoe: The scary Bear for many Americans? (Molly Yanity) 53. Representations of gender in the live broadcast of the Tokyo Olympics (Toni Bruce) 54. “The gender-equal games” vs “The IOC is failing black women”: narratives of progress and failure of the 2020 Tokyo Olympics (Cheryl Cooky) 55. The male and female sports journalists divide on the Twittersphere during Tokyo 2020 (Haim Hagay and Alina Bernstein)
Section 3: Performance & Identity
56. ‘The Games they are a-changin’’: footnotes on Olympic athletics in transition post-Tokyo 2020 (Christopher D. Tulloch) 57. Tokyo 2020: athlete welfare and coping with new anxieties (Emma Kavanagh and Keith D. Parry) 58. Tokyo Olympics: When athletes are faced with the impossible (Dikaia Chatziefstathiou) 59. Twitter helps normalize discussions on mental health beyond athletes (Yuya Kiuchi) 60. Communication of athlete risk with head injuries in the 2020 Olympics (David Cassilio) 61. Racist slurs, stubborn animals, and colonial fear (Karsten Senkbeil) 62. Tokyo 2021 and the LGBTQ athlete (Rory Magrath) 63. The media coverage of the Tokyo 2021 Paralympic Games: Visibility, progress and politics (Emma Pullen, Laura Mora and Michael Silk) 64. It’s complicated: Disability media and the Paralympic Games (Katie Ellis) 65. Companies escape attention as debate on women’s uniform rages (Steve Bien-Aime, Melanie Formentin and Michelle Crowley) 66. Policing the uniforms and sportswear of Tokyo 2020: Commercialism in the name of competition (Linda Fuller) 67. Despite “Gender Equal Olympics,” focus still on what women are wearing (Adrianne Grubic) 68. Black women and Tokyo 2020 games: a continued legacy of racial insensitivity and exclusion (Manase Kudzai Chiweshe) 69. Naomi Osaka Bearing the Torch for a Mixed Race Japan (Jennifer McClearen) 70. Bodies of change: Women’s artistic gymnastics in Tokyo 2021 (Carly Stewart and Natalie Barker-Ruchti) 71. How the female athletes of the Tokyo Olympics are reframing the way we think about motherhood (Kim Bissell and Tyana Ellis) 72. When women aren’t women enough to compete (Anne Osborne)
Section 4: Fandom & National Identity
73. Home advantage in the Summer Olympic Games: evidence from Tokyo 2020 and prospects for Paris 2024 (Girish Ramchandani) 74. Fans as MVP, or the need for sensuous audiences in sport (Meredith Bagley) 75. Silence in the stands: Does it matter for fans? (Dorothy Collins) 76. Red, white, and rivalry: A brief discussion of United States rivalry at the Tokyo Olympic Games (Cody Havard) 77. Empty stadiums and the other sites of Olympic fandom (Lou Antolihao) 78. Sports betting and the branded purity of the Olympics (Jason Lopez) 79. National and ethnic Chinese identities on the Indonesian badminton court (Friederike Trotier) 80. How much is too much home-nation focus in Olympic coverage? (Andrew Billings) 81. The Tokyo 2020 Olympic Games: British imperial identity affirmed (Edward Loveman) 82. Communicating corporate social responsibility at the Tokyo 2020 Olympic Games (Jake Kucek) 83. Americans on ideological left more engaged in Summer Olympics (Darin W. White) 84. South Korea’s changing status and perspective on Japan (Seok Lee) 85. The Men’s 1500 metres: Not quite erasing the ghosts of history (Garry Whannel) 86. Ghana: Poor local organizing, and absence of football team dampens interest (Ernest Acheampong and Ralph Frimpong) 87. Historical disputes, national identity, and the South Korea-Japan summit that did not happen (Guy Podoler) 88. Pop culture diplomacy: Japan’s use of videogames, anime to promote the Olympics and appeal to younger audiences (Adolfo Gracia Vázquez) 89. At the intersection of COVID-19 and Tokyo Olympics 2020: Vlogs and the expression of Chinese nationalist sentiments (Tianwei Ren) 90. Fandom and digital media during the Tokyo 2020 Olympic Games: A Brazilian perspective using @TimeBrasil Twitter data (Renan Petersen-Wagner, Andressa Fontes Guimarães-Mataruna, Adriano Lopes de Souza, Doiara Silva dos Santos, Leonardo José Mataruna-Dos-Santos and Otávio Guimarães Tavares da Silva) 91. National hierarchy in Israeli Olympic discourses (Ilan Tamir)
Section 5: Politics of Sport
92. At Tokyo Games, athlete activism takes front row seat despite IOC’s attempts to silence athletes (Yannick Kluch, Nina Siegfried, Mary A. Hums and Eli A. Wolff) 93. Transgender participation at the Tokyo Olympics: Laurel Hubbard and a media tempest (Holly Thorpe, Shannon Scovel and Monica Nelson) 94. The sacred space of the Olympics (Anthony Cavaiani) 95. Media frames and the ‘humanity’ of athletes (Adam Rugg) 96. We want reform (Shaun M. Anderson) 97. In search of voice: behind the remarkable lack of protest at the Tokyo Paralympics (Filippo Trevisan) 98. The revolt of the Black athlete continues (Letisha Engracia Cardoso Brown) 99. WeThe15 shines a spotlight on disability activism (Damian Haslett and Brett Smith) 100. Will #WeThe85 finally include #WeThe15 as a legacy of Tokyo 2020? (Simon Darcy and Tracey J. Dickson) 101. Activism starts with representation: IPC Section 2.2 and the Paralympics as a platform for social justice (Nina Siegfried, Dr. Yannick Kluch, Mary A. Hums and Eli A. Wolff) 102. The colonization of the athletic body (Billy Hawkins) 103. Forced hijab and female athletes in postrevolutionary Iran (Shahrzad Enderle) 104. Pay equity & the Tokyo 2020 Olympics (Ellen Staurowsky) 105. Equal remuneration for a Paralympian (Mark Brooke) 106. Rooting for U.S. Olympians: Patriotism or polarization? (Amy Bass) 107. Anti-Olympics activism (Jules Boykoff) 108. The new kids on the block: Action sports at the Tokyo Olympic Games (Holly Thorpe and Belinda Wheaton) 109. Is there space on the podium for us all? (Jan Burns) 110. Softball’s field of Olympic dreams (Pamela Creedon) 111. Now you see them, now you don’t: Absent nations at Tokyo Paralympic Games (Nancy Quinn and Laura Misener) 112. The Tokyo Paralympics as a platform for change? Falling well short of sport and media ‘opportunities for all’ (Gerard Goggin and Brett Hutchins) 113. Tokyo 2020 Paralympics: inspirations and legacies (David McGillivray) 114. What social media outrage about Sha’Carri Richardson’s suspension could mean for the future of anti-doping policies (Natalie Brown-Devlin, Gary Wilcox, and Kristen Leah Sussman)
Dr. Ann Luce, Associate Professor in Journalism and Communication in FMC and her colleague, Dr. Ravivarma Rao Panirselvam, a psychiatrist in the Ministry of Health at Hospital Miri were honoured by The Honorable Dato Sri Hajah Fatimah Abdullah, Minister of Welfare, Community Wellbeing, Women, Family and Childhood Development in Sarawak, Malaysia earlier today (September 10th) for their work in creating guidelines for police on how to speak with journalists about suicide deaths and suicide attempts.
The guidelines were launched at a World Suicide Prevention Day event where policy makers, Members of Parliament and the Sarawak State Assembly learned about suicide prevention and discussed the decriminalisation of suicide within the country.
The guidelines, and an accompanying Z-fold flyer for police duty belts, have been distributed to officers within the Royal Malaysia Police in Sarawak. The guidelines advise police to identify a single point of contact (spokesperson) to discuss suicides with journalists and advise them on what type of information they should share with journalists and how to do this safely and responsibly. The guidance also states that police should avoid talking about specific suicide methods and locations of deaths. The guidelines also advise police to provide helpline information so journalists can educate the general population that suicide is a public health issue and not a criminal one.
While Malaysia’s crude suicide rate is about 5.6 per 100,000 inhabitants and below the global crude rate of 10.6 per 100,000 people, suicide rates in Malaysia have been steadily climbing since 2010. With only one psychiatrist for every 200,000 residents in the country, Malaysia falls short of the World Health Organisation recommendation of one psychiatrist to 10,000 residents. Coupled with social stigma regarding mental health and growing mental health problems amongst young people, there is a push within the country to now decriminalise suicide.
Malaysia is believed to be one of about 20 countries around the world that still treats suicide as an illegal act. There are a further 20 countries which follow Islamic or Sharia Law where suicide or suicide attempts are illegal and can be punished with jail sentences.
In partnership with the British Psychological Society (BPS), the summit aims to equip practicing mental health professionals with the most up-to-date, advanced knowledge and treatment options on suicide prevention.
With suicide rates amongst medical professionals some of the highest in the UK, Dr. Luce will share early findings from her most recent research here in Dorset on how suicide is stigmatised amongst mental health professionals, the attitudes and barriers to seeking help within mental healthcare Trusts and what Trusts need to do to make the workplace safer for mental health staff.
Dr. Ann Luce, Associate Professor in Journalism and Communication in FMC will present at the Public Health England and NHS England South West Regional Suicide Prevention Summit tomorrow, 3rd September in honour of World Suicide Prevention Day which is on 10th September.
Dr. Luce will be presenting with Kirsty Hillier, Head of Communications for Dorset’s Integrated Care System on the communication and media strategy she created for the Dorset Clinical Commissioning Group, Public Health Dorset and Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole Council to de-escalate a cluster of suicides at a local railway station in Bournemouth in 2019-2020.
The paper, “Online and Social Media: supporting communities to respond to suspected clusters” will cover how the strategy contributed to the saving of 20 lives between October and December 2019, led to the creation of five active working groups within the multi-agency partnership: 1. Real Time Surveillance and Suicide Attempts group, 2. Communication and Media group, 3. Suicide Bereavement group, 4. High Intensity Presenters group and 5. Training group, and also de-escalated the cluster by June 2020. The paper will also discuss the importance of educating and training local MPs, Councillors, Media and Community on the responsible way to discuss suicide in face-to-face conversations as well as online.
The work is being hailed as best practice by Public Health England and NHS England and is being disseminated across the country via Integrated Care Systems and the regional summits.
At BU we promote and celebrate the work done to engage public audiences with BU research.
The public engagement with research team in Research Development and Support (RDS) can help promote your event to relevant audiences through our regular newsletter and social media channels. It also helps us to stay informed on the public engagement work being carried out by BU.
Please note: we are keen to promote BU public engagement with research activity wherever possible, but completing this form does not guarantee that we will be able to promote your event. To be considered for inclusion, your event or activity must be;
Focused on BU research, either solely or as part of a wider programme.
Events or activities that do not involve BU research, such as marketing or recruitment events, will not be accepted.
Intended for and open to non-academic audiences, either entirely or as a portion of the audience.
Submitted, at the latest, in the first two weeks of the month preceding the event.
For example, an event taking place in June should be submitted via the form any time before 14 May. This is due to lead times on producing and sending the newsletter.
Event descriptions may be edited for consistency in style with other content. If you have any questions about this process, please contact us.
New public engagement and professional development opportunity for Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) climate scientists* looking to engage young people with their environmental science research, and develop their digital and youth engagement capacity.
As part of NERC’s contribution to COP26, NERCPublic Engagement have commissioned a public engagement project that seeks to support young people in the UK who experience eco-anxiety to reshape new positive narratives about the future. Through a series of events and co-design activities, the project will look at how the actions and stories of young citizens and recent scientific advancements in decarbonisation fit together within a systemic picture.
How you can be involved
NERC researchers* are invited to this unique professional development and engagement opportunity to work on the project with eco-anxious young people. Through a series of workshops with young people, you would be supported to share insights from your research and professional careers, engage young people in climate science, and develop your own public engagement skills including co-design, storytelling, digital communication and engagement with young people.
*for this project, Common Vision and NERC, are inviting NERC researchers to be involved, including; PhD students, Early career researchers, and other roles involved in delivering NERC science research, for example, project managers, engagement staff etc.
Time commitment
Researchers who can commit to being involved for at least six months. In the first month (September) approximately a day of your time will be required to feed into the project design and initial materials. From then on, an afternoon in October, December, and February. The total estimated time commitment will be no more than 3 days of your time between September 2021 and March 2022.
More about the project
The magnitude of the climate crisis and the mismatch between the scale of the problem, and the power that any individual has to address it, has left many conscientious young people with feelings of eco-anxiety, anger and helplessness. While these feelings of helplessness may paralyse some young people, they can also be precursors to committed action and positive activism.
This public engagement project, funded by NERC, will examine the narratives which permeate and influence public understanding of climate change. It will draw on insights from environmental science research to understand and showcase the many different ways that citizens are already engaging with decarbonisation on their own terms, and how these individual actions can complement wider structural and systemic shifts. Through active storytelling exercises and live prototyping events, we will engage young people in shaping new positive narratives about the future and co-designing materials, which can be used to address eco-anxiety.
About the partners
This project is a collaboration between the following partners:
Common Vision is an independent think tank with a mission to unite people around long-term intergenerational goals and catalyse collaborative action and collective agency. Common Vision specialises in public dialogue and engagement and has a strong track record facilitating policy dialogue and civic leadership opportunities for young people.
Octophin Digital is a London-based digital agency working primarily within the wildlife conservation, arts and charity sectors.
Force of Nature is a youth non-profit mobilising mindsets for climate action. Force of Nature supports leaders across business, education and policy to centre young people in delivering intergenerational climate solutions
Climate Carersis a team of researchers, designers, policy-makers and educators aiming to understand and support mental health in the current climate and ecological crises. Climate Cares is a collaboration between the Institute of Global Health Innovation and the Grantham Institute at Imperial College London.
Contact
To express an interest in taking part, please email Matilda Agace, Research and Engagement Manager at Common Vision: matilda.agace@covi.org.uk, please copy in Hannah Lacey, NERC Public Engagement Programme Manager: hannah.lacey@nerc.ukri.org no later than 4pm on Tuesday 7 September 2021
Develop new ways to engage the public with environmental science: Applications for funding open now
This funding opportunity aims to support public engagement with environmental science research. Projects will be delivered between October 2021 and March 2022.
Application closing date: 4pm, Friday 10 September 2021
Project End Date: Projects must end by Friday 25 March 2022
The size of these grants (minimum of £1,000 and maximum of £7,000 per project) is designed to allow individuals and organisations to trial public engagement projects that could be innovative in their way of delivery or subject area.
The projects should be designed and delivered as a ‘proof of concept’. NERC hopes that successful grant holders may go on to develop the projects further and access other funding, including public engagement or science funding opportunities from NERC or UKRI.
Your project must incorporate at least two of the following:
work across disciplines, or with people outside of academia
explore new opportunities that have appeared since you applied for other funding
If you would like advice on planning or submitting an application, or to discuss ideas, please contact BU Engagement Officer, Adam Morris publicengagement@bournemouth.ac.uk
The Summer Science Exhibition is the Royal Society’s flagship public engagement event which takes place in July every year at the prestigious home of the Royal Society in central London. The Royal Society are looking for researchers to take part in their festival celebrating the cutting-edge of UK science.
“One of the most enjoyable and satisfying outreach opportunities that I have ever taken part in. The range of visitors is so wide that almost each encounter brings up something new.” Exhibitor, 2019
Taking place between 4 – 10 July 2022, the Exhibition provides an excellent opportunity to engage a variety of audiences with your research, including members of the public, school groups, policy makers and potential funders and fellows of the Royal Society.
Each year, the Royal Society welcome thousands of visitors through their doors and reach many more through national coverage on TV or in the media. This is a fantastic opportunity to raise the profile of UK research and gain valuable experience communicating with diverse audience groups.
“I would highly recommend taking part in Summer Science, for the exposure it has given our research, and for the fantastic experience of connecting with visitors and getting direct feedback.” Exhibitor, 2019
The Royal Society provides help to applicants, from guidance on submitting a proposal to preparing and coordinating an exhibit. If you have any questions, please email the Exhibition team exhibition@royalsociety.org
Alternatively, if you would like advice on planning or submitting an application, or to discuss ideas, please contact BU Engagement Officer, Adam Morris publicengagement@bournemouth.ac.uk
At Café Scientifique, you can explore the latest ideas in science and technology in a relaxed online setting. Enjoy listening to a short talk before engaging in debate and discussion with our guest speaker and audience.
We’ll be joined by Dr Samuel Rennie on Tuesday 7 September from 7.00pm until 8.30pm.
The skeleton of a young woman, dated to almost 10,000 years old, was recently discovered by divers in Mexico. Her bones hint towards a short, hard life and raise questions about the first settlers to America.
The Ixchel skeleton, or Chan Hol 3, is one of the oldest skeletons on the American continent. What makes her stand out, though, is that she was healing from three traumatic skull injuries. Analysing her skull, and comparing it to others found in the area, led researchers to discover what might be a new group of humans. Join us to help unravel the mystery of America’s earliest settlers.
Congratulations to Dr. Shanti Shanker in BU’s Department of Psychology and Dr. Pramod Regmi in the Department of Nursing Science on their paper ‘The Interdisciplinary Team Not the Interdisciplinarist: Reflections on Interdisciplinary Research’ which was accepted over the weekend by the journal Europasian Journal of Medical Sciences. This interesting paper is co-authored with two BU Visiting Faculty, Ms. Jillian Ireland, Professional Midwifery Advocate in Poole Maternity Hospital (University Hospitals Dorset NHS Foundation Trust) and Prof. Padam Simkhada based at the University of Huddersfield. Co-author Dr. Sharada Wasti is also based the University of Huddersfield.
With interdisciplinary research growing in popularity, researchers, lecturers, journal editors and funders to consider how this is going to work in reality. This paper argues that interdisciplinary working is with in the team, not ‘in a person’. Multidisciplinary teams provide unique opportunities for researchers from different disciplines (and hence different ways of working and thinking) to collaborate with one another. We need to be careful not to try to create interdisciplinarists, or at least, not too many. We need people who are strong in their discipline and open-minded/flexible/reflective enough to see the value of other people’s disciplines.
Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen
CMWH (Centre for Midwifery & Women’s Health)
Reference:
Shanker, S., Wasti, S.P., Ireland, J., Regmi, P., Simkhada, P., van Teijlingen, E. (2021) The Interdisciplinary Team Not the Interdisciplinarist: Reflections on Interdisciplinary Research, Europasian Journal of Medical Sciences3(2):1-5.
How well does BU currently support public engagement? What are we doing well, and are there areas that we could quickly and efficiently target to make a big difference?
We’re looking to answer those questions and others, to take stock and plan where to focus our efforts. We’ve created a survey to seek feedback from as many members of BU staff as possible – academic and professional services.
We’ll analyse the results using the NCCPE’s EDGE Tool, and will share our results for discussion in the next academic year.
To share your feedback, complete the short survey below. It should only take a few minutes and all questions are multiple-choice. Your responses are completely anonymous. We require you to be signed into a BU account only to ensure that all responses are from BU staff.
We appreciate the time taken to complete this survey, so are offering the chance to win a £50 Love2Shop e-Gift Card, redeemable at 40+ retailers. At the end of the survey you’ll be directed to a separate form to collect your details for the prize draw.
The survey closes on Friday 13 August, so please provide feedback before then. If you have any questions about the survey, please contact publicengagement@bournemouth.ac.uk
Using immersive and non-immersive virtual reality to distract children with moderate to severe eczema from itching.
Project team: Dr Heidi Singleton, Professor Steven Ersser, Professor Debbie Holley. Associate Professor Xiaosong Yang. Dr Emily Arden-Close. Yaqing Cui- (Research Assistant and software developer), Professor Liz Falconer (Virtual Heritage Ltd), Dr Sarah Thomas, Amanda Roberts (Nottingham Support Group for Carers).
Child aged 5 years using Oculus Quest 2™ Headset
The aim of this project was to co-create immersive and non-immersive VR based on the guided imagery approach to managing moderate to severe eczema, targeted at children aged between 5 and 11 years of age.
Co-creation and Evaluation
Through online surveys (n=6) and semi-structured interviews (n=6), children worked with software developers to codesign the VR Chillout software. Children selected settings, interactions, music and sound effects that they felt would best help them relax and be distracted from their eczema.
Two resources were developed for evaluation: a relaxing 360 video of a woodland scene (click the image to view the interactive video on Youtube) and immersive VR mobile phone games:
Games for mobile phones – (a) Lobby (b) Snowy World (c) Flying over Sakura
For the Oculus Quest 2™, three games were developed. The first game ‘Lovely Fruit Grocery’ provides an immersive interaction experience with cartoon animals, via haptic controllers. The second game is ‘Hand Jet Flying’, which not only keeps the subject’s hand busy but also produces a highly immersive VR experience. The third game is ‘Nature Wonderland’, which focuses on presenting a visually and acoustically immersive and peaceful VR environment with animals, water, and natural elements.
Key findings
Evaluation of 360 woodland scene, via low-cost VR headsets: children found the experience relaxing and felt they were transported to a different space.
Evaluation of mobile VR software: children appreciated additional interactivity offered by the Snowy World animals and flying over Sakura landscapes.
Evaluation of Oculus Quest 2™software (VR game useability survey – n=10 and Children’s Dermatology Life Quality Index survey- n=4): children had the opportunity to use haptic hand controllers and reported that this enhanced the distraction from their eczema. Children felt that the Oculus VR Chillout games were very immersive.
“The animals were very realistic. I enjoyed playing with them and giving them food to eat. I loved the VR games; I feel they helped me to forget my itching.”
(Child aged 11)
Next steps
We have started discussions with the clinical eczema teams in the South of England and RDS regarding future bidding to proceed to clinical trials.
We aim to build upon this work with subsequent HEIF calls.
Further CMWH contributions to 2026 ICM congress
New PhD publication on Nepal’s migrant workers
Six BU contributions 2025 Festival of Social Sciences
ECR Funding Open Call: Research Culture & Community Grant – Apply Now
MSCA Postdoctoral Fellowships 2025 Call
ERC Advanced Grant 2025 Webinar
Horizon Europe Work Programme 2025 Published
Horizon Europe 2025 Work Programme pre-Published
Update on UKRO services
European research project exploring use of ‘virtual twins’ to better manage metabolic associated fatty liver disease