Skip to main content

RM2 F2F Qualitative Project Resources

2 Qualitative project: Preparation (Group)

Welcome to the Chapter where we give you an overview of what you will be doing for your group project in RM2 this semester, and provide you with some resources to help you prepare.

2.1 Overview

2.1.1 Project components

The qualitative project for RM2 has both group and individual components, and you will gain experience of designing a study, collecting data, being a participant in another group's study, processing data, analysing data and writing your data up. All of these will build on the skills you learned in RM1, and will help prepare you to complete your own independent research project for your dissertation.

The qualitative project is broken down as follows:

  • In your groups, you will write a group proposal detailing the key literature for your project, as well as why it is important to conduct. This is a group assessment and is worth 30% of RM2.
  • In your groups, you will choose a topic, then finalise your research question. You will then choose questions you want to ask your participants. You will be allocated another group within your lab to act as your participants. In turn, you will be the participants for another group within your lab.
  • In your groups, you will hold a focus group, which will be held online using Microsoft Teams. You will then prepare your focus group transcript and anonymise it.
  • From this point on, the remainder of the project is conducted individually, with you completing analysis and writing up your report (worth 50% of RM2) on your own. Please note that you MUST use thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006) for your analysis. You are not allowed to use any other forms of analysis (e.g. IPA).

2.1.2 Suggested Project timeline

We have developed a suggested timeline for the group and individual components. We advise that you use this to tackle the project throughout the semester, to avoid leaving yourself lots of work at the end. Do feel free to alter the suggested deadlines if you wish - the purpose is not to be restrictive, but instead to help you by detailing when you might want to complete tasks in order to pace yourself.

2.2 Group Agreement and Task Allocation

We appreciate that group work can be challenging and we want to support you to have an enjoyable and educational group work experience. To that end, we would like each group to create a group agreement that all members sign. The purpose of this is for the group to come together and establish common ground and rules that each of the group members is committed to. You will also be asked to allocate tasks, firstly for the group proposal (in Week 2, alongside the Group Agreement) and then for the Focus Group in Week 5.

2.2.1 Group Agreement (Lab 2)

Please download the group agreement template. Then look at the list of potential items to include. These are provided within the template document itself, as well as below. As a group, discuss which items you want to include in addition to the standard ones provided, and if there are any you would like to edit or add outside of this list. Then, allocate tasks for the group proposal and upload this document individually to moodle before your Week 3 lab. You will be asked, separately, to allocate tasks for the Focus Group in your Week 5 lab.

2.2.1.1 Group Agreement Items (see Lab 2)

Here is a list of items you may want to discuss with your group and add to the group agreement:

  • We all agree to establish a common timeline for the project and discuss any deviations from the timeline together as a group
  • We all agree to communicate with each other openly and honestly about the project and get in touch with the course leads in the event of an unsolvable group conflict.
  • We all agree to respect each other's individual ways of working and will discuss these openly as a group.
  • We all agree to respect diversity in our group. This includes cultural differences, neurodiversity, different work/life situations and may manifest in different ways of working/approaching tasks. We agree to discuss our strengths as a group and divide tasks accordingly.
  • I agree to stay in touch with the group and communicate as established by the group. If I am struggling and I do not feel comfortable sharing that with the group, I will get in touch with the course/programme leads for support
  • We all agree to meet on a regular basis as established by the group. If I cannot make a meeting, I agree to communicate this openly with my group and get in touch to catch up about things I have missed.
  • We agree to plan out the individual contribution of each team member in advance before group work starting and openly communicate any changes that may arise during the project.
  • We agree to establish the best method of communication for our group that's inclusive and takes into account everybody's individual needs.

2.2.2 Group Proposal Task Allocation (see Lab 2)

Please note that this is a suggested list of tasks to get you started. You may find that there are additional tasks you allocate within your group as part of the project. You may have one person on a particular task, with multiple people on others. There is no one correct way to do this, and it is fine if the task allocation changes at a later date. It is intended to be a live document that you update as you progress with the group project.

2.2.2.1 Group Proposal Items

Prep work

  • Finalise your group agreement an submit to Moodle individually (EVERYBODY)
  • Identify, share and read studies related to your topic and qualitative/focus group methodology (EVERYBODY)
  • Develop and finalise your research question (EVERYBODY)
  • Identify which course materials to use for support for each section

Lead writing

  • Summarise studies on the background of your RQ
  • Write section 1 (background to topic)
  • Read BPS code of ethics and identify potential issues for the study
  • Discuss the justification for your study and its methodology (EVERYBODY)
  • Draft section 2A (why use qualitative methods for this particular topic)
  • Draft section 2B (why Focus Groups)
  • Draft section 2C (why this specific sample)
  • Draft section 3 (ethics)

Editing and reviewing

  • Edit the group proposal to make it into a cohesive piece
  • Formatting and referencing (make consistent)
  • Check that in-text citations and reference list match
  • Agree on the final piece together (read the final version and agrees to it) (EVERYBODY)
  • Final proofread for spelling and grammar

Admin

  • Create a shared citation library
  • Set up a Teams chat/channel and a shared oneDrive folder for your group
  • Make sure everybody has access and editing rights to shared documents
  • Keeping track of group communication (minutes of meetings, to-do lists etc)
  • Group management (coordination of meetings, scheduling)
  • Draft and Final Proposal submission

2.2.3 Focus Group Task Allocation (see Lab 5)

In lab 5, we will ask you to allocate tasks for running the focus group. Please see below for a list of tasks that are involved (there may be additional tasks you wish to allocate among your team).

2.2.3.1 Focus Group items

Prep work and getting materials together

  • Set up a shared version of the ‘checklist’ to ensure that you complete all tasks required for the focus group. This checklist contains the same list of tasks as listed here, but it is important that you keep a record of what has been completed.
  • Read over the ‘data collection’ chapter in the Qualitative book
  • Choose questions from the question bank, adapting them as required. If you decide to make any new questions, these must be discussed in office hours with your tutor before you collect data.
  • Pilot your questions (i.e. ask someone to look over them for clarity and to ensure they make sense)
  • Adapt the following documents for your study:
    • Information sheet
    • Consent form
  • Finalise the focus group schedule and develop two versions (one with probes/prompts and one without)
  • Decide on demographic questions and set up the questionnaire using Microsoft Forms

Organising the focus group

  • Find out which group will be your participants (this information is on the ‘group allocation’ spreadsheet released at the start of week 2).
  • Contact your participants and arrange a date and time for the focus group. This will be held online using Microsoft Teams. You should aim to hold it in Week 8
  • Practice setting up a meeting, including sending an invitation, recording, transcribing and accessing the recording and transcript after the meeting.
  • Send the Information sheet, Consent Form, and (if applicable) Demographics survey to your participants in advance of the focus group. Participants should complete the demographics and return the completed consent form
  • Send the focus group schedule to participants at least 24 hours in advance of the focus group
  • Agree who will be the facilitator and note-taker. Decide if the others in the group would like to attend or not (if yes, please ask the participants first and ensure mics/cameras are turned off for the focus group itself)
  • Agree the specific ground rules that you will discuss with participants at the start of your focus group

Data Storage Preparation

  • Set up a shared OneDrive folder for all documents related to the focus group
  • Store the following in your shared folder:
    • Focus group schedule version 1 (with prompts, for the facilitator)
    • Focus group schedule version 2 (without prompts, for the participants)
    • Ground rules
    • Adapted information sheet
    • Adapted consent form
    • Completed consent forms
    • Template transcript

Transcribing and Anonymisation

  • Obtain the transcript from Stream
  • Correct any errors in the automatic transcript
  • Agree on how you will anonymise the data
  • Anonymise the data

2.3 Topic Guide

As part of your qualitative project, you will be expected to write a review of the literature as part of your Introduction section. It is important that the Introduction has a clear rationale which supports your chosen research question.

What follows here is an outline of various topics you should consider when you develop your research question, and which form the starting point for you project.

One of the aims of qualitative research is to be critical of some of the assumptions made by mainstream quantitative studies and to highlight their limitations. In highlighting limitations, you should aim to develop research questions that address weaknesses identified and provide a rationale for using a focus group methodology.

You should use this topic guide to help you plan your study, and support you with your research questions and rationale assignment. However, you are in no way expected to read everything in the reference section (or even within each topic). These references are provided purely to give you a starting point, and you are encouraged to go beyond the scope of what is provided here.

After the four topics have been presented, we will provide some information about your rationale, and also some key steps for moving forward.

Three research topics:

  1. Nature access, nature connectedness and wellbeing
  2. Students and mental health
  3. Belonging at University

2.3.1 Topic 1: Nature access, nature connectedness and wellbeing

Philosophers, writers, environmentalists and ecologists have long argued that humans derive physiological and psychological benefits from spending time in natural environments, such as forests, beaches or mountains (Wilson, 1984). Wilson argued for a strong evolutionary basis for this effect: our species had spent hundreds of thousands of years (nearly all of its evolutionary history) living and thriving within natural environments, humans should have a deep rooted connection with nature that is beneficial to us. Since everyday survival depended on activities such as finding food, water or firewood, and avoiding predators, all of which required humans to be attentive and responsive to any cues the environment might offer, individuals who were more connected with nature would have had an important advantage in that context.

Over half of the world’s population lives in an urban, rather than rural, environment and this is expected to increase to 68% by 2050 (United Nations, 2018; World Health Organization, 2011). In Canada, more than 80% of people live in urban areas, and Canadians spend almost 90% of their time indoors (Howell & Passmore, 2013). In a survey of 1,000 United Kingdom citizens, only 55% of those over the age of 35, and 37% of those under the age of 35, reported feeling “connected to the natural world” (Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, 2010). Both time-criterion and nature- knowledge-criterion studies show that nature-based recreation is on the decline in many countries (Charles & Louv, 2009).

At the same time, research into nature connectedness shows that engaging with natural environments can have beneficial effects on a wide range of psychological and physiological aspects of wellbeing (Burns, 2005; White et al., 2019), and that these effects can be seen even with relatively minor interventions (Berto, 2005). In the last 30 years, environmental and positive psychologists have gathered considerable evidence that supports the idea that humans benefit from contact with nature ( Berto, 2014; Howell & Passmore, 2013), and that green space can provide a buffer against the negative health impact of stressful life events (van den Berg et al., 2010). The available research investigates a wide range of benefits, from physical health and longevity to happiness, cognitive focus and attentional capacity, and has been done using a wide variety of methods. Considering the preponderance of stress and mental health problems facing the developed world (Gullone, 2000; WHO, 2022), studying the effects of nature is an important task for psychologists. On a more personally relevant note, understanding the effects of green spaces and animals on wellbeing can give you another set of tools that can be used to enhance your own wellbeing and help cope with the stress of university life.

Nature affiliation and access to nature

There are two important related concepts in nature connectedness literature.

Access to nature means the extent to which a person is in contact with nature, which can be measured objectively by logging location or looking at area maps. A lot of epidemiological studies use objective measures of green space access to see if it affects population health, while experimental studies can use nature contact interventions to see how people respond.

Nature connectedness/affiliation trait: this means the personal characteristics that make a person appreciate nature more and is usually measured with self-report questionnaires. It has been defined as “individuals’ experiential sense of oneness with the natural world” (Mayer & Frantz, 2004). Smaller studies often look at how the trait of nature connectedness interacts with nature access to predict various aspects of wellbeing.

State of nature connectedness: this means the current, changing relationship with nature, something that is “dynamic, changing from day to day and moment to moment as a function of experiences with nature” (Weinstein, Przybylski, & Ryan, 2009).

Research on effects of nature access and connectedness

Large scale epidemiological research

One of the possible ways of investigating nature connectedness is by comparing similar populations with varying degrees of access to natural environments. One of such studies analysed five year survival rates for over 3000 Tokyo seniors, born between 1903 and 1918 (Takano, Nakamura, & Watanabe, 2002) and found that longevity was greater among senior citizens living in areas with walkable green spaces. Variables such as age, sex, marital status, socioeconomic status, and baseline physical ability were controlled. Having walkable green streets and spaces near the seniors’ residences showed significant predictive value for elderly survival over the 5 years of the study.

In Holland, researchers reviewed records for 250,782 citizens being treated by 104 general practitioners and confirmed a robust relationship between green spaces and health (Maas, Verheij, Groenewegen, de Vries, & Spreeuwenberg, 2006). The paper reported that “health differences in residents of urban and rural municipalities are to a large extent explained by the amount of green space” in the individuals’ direct living environment (p. 591). Additionally, the relation between green space and health was found to be stronger for lower socioeconomic groups and that elderly, youth, and secondary educated people in large cities seemed to benefit more from presence of green areas in their living environment than other groups.

Finally, University of Glasgow researchers (Mitchell & Popham, 2008) looked at income-related health inequality within the English population below the retirement age, obtaining anonymised data from the Office for National Statistics and amassing data from over 40 million people. They found that populations living in the greenest environments also had lowest levels of health inequality related to income deprivation and had lower all-cause and circulatory mortality rates.

Overall, the available large scale epidemiological research shows a clear association between having access to green spaces in urban areas or living in a natural setting and various subjective and objective health outcomes. These associations remain relevant when controlling for education and income, and in fact become stronger for lower levels of socioeconomic status. This has implications for supporting student mental health in higher education (Hughes & Spanner, 2019), with universities recognising the impact of the campus environment and green space as part of a stepped approach to supporting student mental health and wellbeing (Universities UK, 2020).

Correlational research

There are numerous correlational studies that look at how nature access and nature affiliation affect different aspects of wellbeing. The studies that established the three measures of nature affiliation found significant correlations between their scales and life satisfaction (Mayer & Frantz, 2004), positive affect (Mayer et al., 2009) and autonomy, positive affect and personal growth (Nisbet, Zelenski, & Murphy, 2011). Herzog & Strevey (2008) also showed that undergraduate students’ self-reported degree of contact with nature correlated with positive affect and personal growth.

Experimental research

Experimental research on nature access and connectedness is focused on presenting participants with nature-related interventions and observing whether these had a positive effect on a variety of measures of health and wellbeing. Mayer et al. (2009) carried out three experiments manipulating exposure to nature - spending 15 min in either a nature park or in an urban setting, watching a 10-min video clip of nature or urban setting and engaging in a nature walk or to watch a video clip of the same walk. In all three of these studies, the nature condition had no effect on negative affect, but participants’ positive affect was boosted compared to those in the control conditions. Berman, Jonides, & Kaplan (2008) randomly assigned undergraduate students to spend 50 min walking in either a park or an urban setting, and discovered that only the nature walk resulted in a mood increase. Weinstein et al. (2009) carried out 4 experiments looking at whether exposure to nature affected how we value intrinsic aspirations, which are goals that in themselves satisfy basic psychological needs (such as personal growth, intimacy, community) and extrinsic aspirations, which are pursued to derive rewards or positive regard from others (e.g., money, image, fame). In all four studies, participants exposed to nature endorsed more intrinsic and less extrinsic values, which is in turn related to helpfulness in social situations, and feelings of community cohesion.

Qualitative approach

Despite a richness of quantitative studies on this topic, very few qualitative enquiries have been published to date. Combined with the relative rarity of qualitative approaches to topics not immediately neighbouring social psychology, this means that there is a lot of scope for qualitative research within positive psychology, and the field of nature connectedness in particular.

One interesting mixed methods study has been done on students using a green prescription activity of taking a walk in nature, facilitated by a mobile phone app (Boyd, 2022). The intervention and students’ experience of engaging with the natural environment were discussed in focus groups and analysed using a grounded theory approach. Key themes included students’ experience of and the design of university spaces, a desire for safe and sociable spaces, nature as a place of shelter from the city, and requests for more natural and wild landscapes. Interestingly, cultural and social factors, such as working hours and upbringing influenced students’ seeking out opportunities to interact with green spaces while on campus.

Another mixed methods study on the wellbeing of allotment gardeners (Webber, Hinds, & Camic, 2015) found that the gardeners’ subjective well-being and quality of life were higher than population means would suggest, and that this was related to the time they spent in their allotments and how connected to nature they felt. Analysis of open ended survey responses indicated 4 main themes in the data: having own space, feeling connectedness, benefits to physical health and engaging in meaningful activity. This study set forth with a very broad qualitative research question, and only had a limited form of data to work with, so the themes are very general.

A fully qualitative study was carried out on Toronto and Chicago office workers’ perceptions of green roof spaces (Loder, 2014). Loder carried out phenomenological, social constructionist analysis of semi-structured interviews, which covered constructs such as attitudes to nature and green roofs in particular, health and work environment. The analysis uncovered five themes: aesthetics of roof spaces, surprise and fascination with the greens spaces, symbolism of urban green spaces and the relationship between green roofs and well-being.

2.3.1.1 Nature and wellbeing: Potential project topics

  • Experience of nature while studying or traveling abroad. How do we engage with nature when we’re not in our usual place of stay, and how does it affect our wellbeing?
  • Accounts of practice: How do people living in cities engage with green spaces?
  • What perceived benefits do the green spaces around the University campus bring?
  • How can university green spaces be designed as a wellbeing resource for students?

These are just a few example questions. You are encouraged to develop these ideas or come up with new questions based on your reading.

2.3.2 Topic 2: Students and mental health

There has been increasing concern about the mental health of students at university. In a survey of over 2,000 students, suicide ideation was reported by 2%. Anxiety and depression symptoms were also commonly reported (Eisenberg et al., 2007). Another study conducted over two time points found that mental health problems are persistent and that many people do not seek the help they need (Zivin et al., 2009).

Interestingly, it has been shown that sleep disturbances in students, when treated, can also improve mental health status (Freeman et al., 2015), suggesting an intimate link between sleep and mental health. Guidelines have been published by the American Academy of Sleep Medicine as to how much sleep is recommended across different age groups. For teenagers aged 13-18 , 8-10 hours are recommended, for adults (aged 18-60), 7 hours or more on a regular basis is recommended for optimal mental and physical health (Badr et al., 2015). Indeed, getting an adequate amount of sleep is associated with lower anxiety, tension, depression and higher satisfaction with life (Pilcher & Walters, 1997). The topic of student’s mental health has received media attention recently with articles suggesting that there is a “mental health crisis” (Thomas, 2018).

Students and seeking support

Universities provide support for students, and this support maybe come in many forms, from free counselling services to well-being advisors (Raunic & Xenos, 2008).

In one study, it was reported that only 3% of students used their university counselling service, and only 5% of those who were characterised as vulnerable based on questionnaire scores, used the services (Cooke et al., 2006). This suggests that the majority of students did not make use of services available.

There are many reasons why students may not choose to seek help, including being unaware of services, low socio-economic status, being from an Asian background, embarrassment about having to seek help and scepticism about the services (Eisenberg et al., 2007; Gulliver et al., 2010).

Another issue around seeking support is that many who do chose to get help, have to wait long periods for appointments (Mowbray et al., 2006). In a recent article reported in the Independent, a waiting time of 4 months was cited for some universities. These delays to support, can lead to emergence of mental health crises situations. Unfortunately, in this the University of Glasgow had one of the longest wait times for counselling (Buchan, 2018).

2.3.2.1 Students and mental health: Potential project topics

  • What are student perceptions of the mental health services provided by Universities?
  • What are student’s views on how universities can support students and their mental health needs?

These are just two example questions. You are encouraged to develop these ideas or come up with new questions based on your reading.

2.3.3 Topic 3: Belonging at University

There is extensive evidence that feeling a sense of belonging (also sometimes referred to as identifying with a group) is considered to be a basic psychological need (Baumeister & Leary, 1995). Feeling like we belong can foster a sense of personal control (Greenaway et al, 2015), increase meaning and purpose in life (Haslam et al., 2018) protect from existential anxiety (Sani, Herrera & Bowe, 2009), and promote reciprocal support (Levine, Prosser, Evans, & Reicher, 2005).

Furthermore, research has found a robust link between feeling like you belong to a range of different social groups (including family, University, workplace, and friend groups) and positive psychological outcomes. These outcomes include a degree of protection from depression (Cruwys et al., 2014; Sani et al. 2012), anxiety (Sani et al., 2012; Wakefield et al., 2013), post-traumatic stress (Swartzman et al., 2016), paranoia (Sani et al.,, 2017; Greenaway et al., 2018), and cognitive decline (Haslam et al., 2010).

Thinking specifically about University, having a sense of belonging is associated with academic success and motivation (Freeman et al., 2007). There is also evidence that it is related to students’ wellbeing, with higher levels of postive emotions, self-worth and social acceptance being linked with feelings of belonging to University (Pittman and Richmond, 2007; Wilson et al., 2015). Students who do not feel like they connect with their University may be more likely to disengage, increasing the likelihood of considering leaving university without completing (Pedler et al., 2022).

Given these findings, it is important to understand what can help facilitate a sense of belonging at University, and what barriers might be in place to reduce the likelihood of feeling like you belong.

Facilitating a sense of belonging for students

There has been a recent focus on how Universities can develop a sense of belonging for their students, e.g, Samura (2022) published an article in The Conversation discussing how we can meaningfully think about belonging at University. WONKHE (an organisation related to debate in Higher Education) and Pearson (an academic publisher) published a (non-peer-reviewed) report exploring ways in which institutions can help students develop a sense of belonging. They found that there were four key areas that were important: connection (e.g. developing friendships and peer connections), inclusion (e.g. diverse, inclusive content), support (e.g. ability to access appropriate support at the point of needing it) and autonomy (e.g. being able to contribute to the wider university experience) (Blake et al., 2022).

Pedler et al. (2022) found that there are positive correlations between belonging, motivation and enjoyment at University. It also seems to be the case that a sense of belonging is related to specific actions/behaviours that support achievement in students (Gillen-O'Neel, 2021). Many of the studies in this area have looked at these through a quantitative lens, with fewer delving into why these relationships might occur, or why they might be important to students.

2.3.3.1 Belonging at University: potential project questions

  • What can Universities do to help facilitate a sense of belonging for their postgraduate students?
  • What do students perceive as barriers to a feeling of belonging at University?
  • What can postgraduate Psychology Conversion course students do to facilitate a sense of belonging to their University/programme?

These are just a few example questions. You are encouraged to develop these ideas or come up with new ideas based on your reading.

2.3.4 Rationale for using qualitative methodologies

In research methodology “fitting the approach to the research purposes is the critical issue” (Rossi, Lipsey, & Freeman, 2003), therefore all decisions about methodology have to be made after careful consideration about their fitness for purpose. Since qualitative approaches to research design are suited to uncovering new ideas and exploring areas that have not been investigated before (Marshall & Rossman, 2014) your projects will use qualitative methods.

The main purpose of a focus group is to draw upon the range of respondents’ attitudes and feelings; this could not be done using other methods such as interviews or observations. Compared to individual interviews, which aim to obtain individual attitudes and feelings, focus groups can be used to obtain a group consensus. More data can be collected in a shorter period of time.

When using qualitative approaches their emphasis is on describing a meaningful social world (Silverman, 2015). Quantitative and qualitative approaches produce different, but not incompatible data. Therefore, using qualitative methods does not detract from what already exists within the quantitative literature.

Indeed, both qualitative and quantitative approaches can produce different data, which together explores the phenomenon. Let's think about it using a different example to those in the topics above. For example, past research in the area of poor quality sleep suggests that whie sleep quality is accepted as a clinical construct, it represents a complex phenomenon that is difficult to measure and define. It could be argued that “sleep quality” can be measured could contain quantitative aspects- for example duration of time sleeping or number of arousals. However, there are also more subjective aspects to sleep too, such as restfulness.

2.3.5 Overall guidance and next steps

Some of the topics may be sensitive for people, and therefore it is important to not be overly direct and also to be ethical in the way you ask questions. If you are asking about mental health, for example, don't ask your participants about their own mental health. Remember that you will be working with your peers, and they will be known to you. Instead, ask about their opinions to do with mental health.

When designing questions, you can refer to chapter 3 as cited in Braun and Clarke (Braun & Clarke, 2013), as well as guidance cited in Agee (2009). In terms of next steps, you need to agree on a topic area, and potential research questions. Complete your summative assignment for the Group Proposal (Research Question and Rationale) by the due date.

2.3.6 References (sorted by topic)

2.3.6.1 Topic 1: Green Spaces

Berman, M. G., Jonides, J., & Kaplan, S. (2008). The cognitive benefits of interacting with nature. Psychological Science, 19(12), 1207–1212. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02225.x

Berto, R. (2005). Exposure to restorative environments helps restore attentional capacity. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 25(3), 249–259. doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2005.07.001

Berto, R. (2014). The Role of Nature in Coping with Psycho-Physiological Stress: A Literature Review on Restorativeness. Behavioral Sciences, 4(4), 394-409. Retrieved from https://www.mdpi.com/2076-328X/4/4/394

Boyd, F. (2022). Between the Library and Lectures: How Can Nature Be Integrated Into University Infrastructure to Improve Students’ Mental Health. Frontiers in Psychology, 13. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.865422

Burns, G. W. (2005). Naturally happy, naturally healthy: the role of the natural environment in well-being. In F. . Huppert, N. Baylis, & B. Keverne (Eds.), The Science of Well-Being. Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi:DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198567523.003.0016

Charles, C., & Louv, R. (2009). Children’s Nature Deficit: What We Know – and Don’t Know. Children & Nature Network, (September), 1–32. Retrieved from www.childrenandnature.org/downloads/CNNEvidenceoftheDeficit.pdf

Gullone, E. (2000). THE BIOPHILIA HYPOTHESIS AND LIFE IN THE 21st CENTURY: INCREASING MENTAL HEALTH OR INCREASING PATHOLOGY? Journal of Happiness Studies, (June), 293–321. doi:10.1023/A:1010043827986

Howell, A. J., & Passmore, H. (2013). The Nature of Happiness: Nature Affiliation and Mental Well-Being. In C. L. . Keyes (Ed.), Mental Well-Being: International Contributions to the Study of Positive Mental Health (pp. 231–257). Dordrecht: Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht. doi:10.1007/978-94-007-5195-8

Hughes, G. S., L. (2019). The-University-Mental-Health-Charter. Retrieved from https://www.studentminds.org.uk/charter.html

Loder, A. (2014). “There”s a meadow outside my workplace’: A phenomenological exploration of aesthetics and green roofs in Chicago and Toronto. Landscape and Urban Planning, 126, 94–106. doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2014.01.008

Maas, J., Verheij, R. a, Groenewegen, P. P., de Vries, S., & Spreeuwenberg, P. (2006). Green space, urbanity, and health: how strong is the relation? Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 60(7), 587–592. doi:10.1136/jech.2005.043125

Mayer, F. S., & Frantz, C. M. (2004). The connectedness to nature scale: A measure of individuals’ feeling in community with nature. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24(4), 503–515. doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2004.10.001

Mayer, F. S., Frantz, C. M., Bruehlman-Senecal, E., McPherson Frantz, C., Bruehlman-Senecal, E., & Dolliver, K. (2009). Why Is Nature Beneficial?: The Role of Connectedness to Nature. Environment and Behavior, 41(5), 607–643. doi:10.1177/0013916508319745

Mitchell, R., & Popham, F. (2008). Effect of exposure to natural environment on health inequalities: an observational population study. Lancet, 372(9650), 1655–1660. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(08)61689-X

Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (2010) The State of the UK’s Birds. Retried from https://www.rspb.org.uk/globalassets/downloads/documents/conservation-science/state-of-the-uks-birds_2010.pdf

Takano, T., Nakamura, K., & Watanabe, M. (2002). Urban residential environments and senior citizens’ longevity in megacity areas: the importance of walkable green spaces. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 56(12), 913–918. doi:10.1136/jech.56.12.913

United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division (2018). World Urbanization Prospects: The 2018 Revision, Online Edition. https://population.un.org/wup/Download/

Universities UK (2020). Stepchange: Mentally Healthy Universities. Retrieved from https://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/what-we-do/policy-and-research/publications/stepchange-mentally-healthy-universities

van den Berg, A. E., Maas, J., Verheij, R. A., & Groenewegen, P. P. (2010). Green space as a buffer between stressful life events and health. Social Science & Medicine, 70(8), 1203-1210. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.01.002

Webber, J., Hinds, J., & Camic, P. M. (2015). The well-being of allotment gardeners: A mixed methodological study. Ecopsychology, 7(March), 20–28. doi:10.1089/eco.2014.0058 Weinstein, N., Przybylski, A. K., & Ryan, R. M. (2009). Can nature make us more caring? Effects of immersion in nature on intrinsic aspirations and generosity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 35(10), 1315–1329. doi:10.1177/0146167209341649

White, M. P., Alcock, I., Grellier, J., Wheeler, B. W., Hartig, T., Warber, S. L., . . . Fleming, L. E. (2019). Spending at least 120 minutes a week in nature is associated with good health and wellbeing. Scientific Reports, 9(1), 7730. doi:10.1038/s41598-019-44097-3

Wilson, E. O. (1984). Biophilia. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

World Health Organization. (2011). World health statisitics 2011. World health statistics 2011. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1096-987X(199802)19:3<259::AID-JCC1>3.0.CO;2-S

World Health Organisation (2022). World mental health report; transforming mental health for all Retrieved from https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240049338

2.3.6.2 Topic 2: Students and mental health

Buchan, L. January, 2018. Students wait up to four months for mental health support at UK universities. The Independent. Retrieved from: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/students-mental-health-support-waitingtimes-counselling-university-care-diagnosis-treatment-liberal-a8124111.html

Cooke, R., Bewick, B. M., Barkham, M., Bradley, M., & Audin, K. (2006). Measuring, monitoring and managing the psychological well-being of first year university students. British Journal of Guidance & Counselling, 34(4), 505-517. doi:10.1080/03069880600942624

Eisenberg, D., Golberstein, E., & Gollust, S. E. (2007). Help-seeking and access to mental health care in a university student population. Medical care, 594-601.

Gulliver, A., Griffiths, K. M., & Christensen, H. (2010). Perceived barriers and facilitators to mental health help-seeking in young people: a systematic review. BMC Psychiatry, 10(1), 113.

Lu, S. H., Dear, B. F., Johnston, L., Wootton, B. M., & Titov, N. (2014). An internet survey of emotional health, treatment seeking and barriers to accessing mental health treatment among Chinese-speaking international students in Australia. Counselling Psychology Quarterly, 27(1), 96-108.

Mowbray, C. T., Megivern, D., Mandiberg, J. M., Strauss, S., Stein, C. H., Collins, K., . . . Lett, R. (2006). Campus mental health services: recommendations for change. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 76(2), 226.

Raunic, A., & Xenos, S. (2008). University counselling service utilisation by local and international students and user characteristics: A review. International Journal for the advancement of Counselling, 30(4), 262-267.

Thomas, K. August, 2018. Mental health at university: know where to find support. The Guardian. Retrieved from: https://www.theguardian.com/education/2018/aug/14/mental-health-atuniversity-know-where-to-find-support

Zivin, K., Eisenberg, D., Gollust, S. E., & Golberstein, E. (2009). Persistence of mental health problems and needs in a college student population. Journal of Affective Disorders, 117(3), 180-185.

2.3.6.3 Topic 3: Belonging at University

Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117(3), 497–529. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.117.3.497

Blake, S., Capper, G., & Jackson, A. (2022, October). Building belonging in Higher Education. WONKHE, https://wonkhe.com/wp-content/wonkhe-uploads/2022/10/Building-Belonging-October-2022.pdf

Cruwys, T., Haslam, S. A., Dingle, G. A., Haslam, C., & Jetten, J. (2014). Depression and social identity: An integrative review. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 18(3), 215-238.

Freeman, T. M., Anderman, L. H., & Jensen, J. M. (2007). Sense of belonging in college freshmen at the classroom and campus levels. The Journal of Experimental Education, 75(3), 203-220.

Greenaway, K. H., Haslam, S. A., & Bingley, W. (2018). Are “they” out to get me? A social identity model of paranoia. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 1368430218793190.

Greenaway, K. H., Haslam, S. A., Cruwys, T., Branscombe, N. R., Ysseldyk, R., & Heldreth, C. (2015). From “we” to “me”: Group identification enhances perceived personal control with consequences for health and well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 109(1), 53.

Haslam, C., Haslam, S. A., Jetten, J., Bevins, A., Ravenscroft, S., & Tonks, J. (2010). The social treatment: The benefits of group interventions in residential care settings. Psychology and aging, 25(1), 157.

Haslam, S. A., McMahon, C., Cruwys, T., Haslam, C., Jetten, J., & Steffens, N. K. (2018). Social cure, what social cure? The propensity to underestimate the importance of social factors for health.Social Science & Medicine, 198, 14-21.

Levine, M., Prosser, A., Evans, D., & Reicher, S. (2005). Identity and emergency intervention: How social group membership and inclusiveness of group boundaries shape helping behavior. Personality and social psychology bulletin, 31(4), 443-453.

Pedler, M. L., Willis, R., & Nieuwoudt, J.E. (2022) A sense of belonging at university: student retention, motivation and enjoyment, Journal of Further and Higher Education, 46 (3), 397-408, DOI: 10.1080/0309877X.2021.1955844

Pittman, L. D., & Richmond, A. (2007). Academic and psychological functioning in late adolescence: The importance of school belonging. The Journal of Experimental Education, 75(4), 270-290.

Samura, M. (2022, May 6) 3 ways to make ‘belonging’ more than a buzzword in higher ed. The Conversation, https://theconversation.com/3-ways-to-make-belonging-more-than-a-buzzword-in-higher-ed-175731

Sani, F., Herrera, M., & Bowe, M. (2009). Perceived collective continuity and ingroup identification as defence against death awareness. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45(1), 242-245.

Sani, F., Herrera, M., Wakefield, J. R., Boroch, O., & Gulyas, C. (2012). Comparing social contact and group identification as predictors of mental health. British Journal of Social Psychology, 51(4), 781-790.

Sani, F., Wakefield, J. R., Herrera, M., & Zeybek, A. (2017). On the association between greater family identification and lower paranoid ideation among non-clinical individuals: Evidence from cypriot and spanish students. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 36(5), 396-418.

Swartzman, S., Sani, F., & Munro, A. J. (2017). The role of social support, family identification, and family constraints in predicting posttraumatic stress after cancer. Psycho‐oncology, 26(9), 1330-1335.

Wakefield, J. R., Bickley, S., & Sani, F. (2013). The effects of identification with a support group on the mental health of people with multiple sclerosis. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 74(5), 420-426.

Wilson, D., Jones, D., Bocell, F., Crawford, J., Kim, M. J., Veilleux, N., ... & Plett, M. (2015). Belonging and academic engagement among undergraduate STEM students: A multi-institutional study. Research in Higher Education, 56(7), 750-776.

2.3.6.4 General

Agee, J. (2009). Developing qualitative research questions: a reflective process. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 22(4), 431-447.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2013). Successful qualitative research: A practical guide for beginners: sage.

Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (2014). Designing qualitative research: Sage publications.

Rossi, P. H., Lipsey, M. W., & Freeman, H. E. (2003). Evaluation: A systematic approach: Sage publications.

Silverman, D. (2015). Interpreting qualitative data: Sage.