Renate Ysseldyk, Department of Health Sciences

By Ariel Root

Religion. Ethnicity. Gender. Age. All of these groups influence one’s sense of belonging. One’s self-image. These factors, and others, can give us a sense of social identity. They can influence how we manage our social world, and can have profound impacts on our health. “Social identities reflect our group memberships…and are often helpful in coping with stressful life experiences, and also in [healthy] aging.”

Renate Ysseldyk is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Health Sciences at ĐÓ°ÉÔ­´´ University, where she is interested in the influence of psychosocial factors, like social identities, on stressful experiences such as religious discrimination or transitions associated with aging. Her research focuses on the social determinants of health, particularly among vulnerable populations, and how social identities can influence physical and mental health.

Ysseldyk indicates that many of her research challenges relate to the sample populations within her studies. Vulnerable populations, in her research, have included women who have experienced abuse, and older adults who are living with dementia. “But these [challenges] are also some of the most rewarding experiences, because you’re really making a difference for people who need it,” she explains. Ysseldyk recalls a project she worked on recently, led by Artswell and in collaboration with the Alzheimer Society of Ottawa and Renfrew County, Bruyère Continuing Care, and the Community Foundation of Ottawa, called “”. Community participants living with dementia gathered weekly with their caregivers to build a new social identity based on making music, reminiscing about the past, and connecting with each other.

Using a combination of observational measures (designed specifically for people living with dementia), interviews, and survey questionnaires, Ysseldyk and her students evaluated the cognitive and mental health benefits of the Music Matters program, findingĚýthat it was also an extremely rewarding project. “Seeing people who were originally quiet, but later opened-up and sang and danced… you can see on their faces that [the program] is improving their life… it’s really fun,” she explains. And the benefits of the program were equally evident among the caregivers, who developed a sense of social identity with the group over time, and this had personal, social, health, and even spiritual impacts.

Combining aging, identity, religion, stress and coping, Ysseldyk acknowledges that a lot of her projects are intertwined – they have to be. And so there are many projects that stand out for Ysseldyk. She recounts her PhD work when she first considered the relationship between social identity and religious affiliation, exploring the psychological implications and outcomes of individuals coping with various threats to their religious identity. From there, Ysseldyk completed a CIFAR post-doctoral fellowship with the University of Exeter in the UK, and later a SSHRC post-doctoral fellowship with the University of Queensland in Australia, both under the guidance of Drs. Alex and Cath Haslam. Here is where she was “really introduced to doing research on some of the social determinants of health in older adults.” Ysseldyk credits these experiences to having evolved her research and demographic interests. And so, despite having several “different lines of research, they all overlap. There’s no one big goal” for Ysseldyk. In fact, it’s about “trying to figure out the little ways to improve peoples’ health, well-being, and overall quality of life.”

“The concept of social determinants of health can be abstract, and discovering the “causes of the causes” requires digging” – and a lot of it. More digging will always lead to more questions, and more answers. In deciding where to research next, Ysseldyk says her next step is often built on what she did last: “What did I learn in the last project that will lead to my next question?” Ysseldyk says she’s always had an interest in both health and psychology. And through her graduate studies and post-doctoral work, she was able to merge those two, as well as overlap with social neuroscience.

Several of Ysseldyk’s next projects will similarly require an interdisciplinary research team, as she continues to investigate the role of various social factors on the health and well-being of older adults. With colleagues from neuroscience as well as several community partners, including Bruyère Continuing Care and Riverstone Retirement Communities, they will consider the links between valued social identities and both mental and physical health outcomes, such as depressive symptoms and telomere length.

But regardless of the question—or the answer—for Ysseldyk, it’s about the journey. “I love the teaching and the research. Finding new things that interest me and that might help improve the health and well-being of others, that’s what drives me to work every day, and to answer these questions… it’s that I truly want to be here and to make some positive difference—great or small—in people’s lives.”

To find out more about Renate Ysseldyk, clickĚýhere.

Most of us think that we understand what it means to be “healthy”: eat the right foods, get enough exercise, lose weight. What is less obvious is how belonging to social groups can protect and enhance health and well-being both physically and mentally. For example, identifying with groups can be beneficial to mental health as group membership provides people with social resources to confront and overcome adversity. It also buffers against unhealthy mental states such as depression and anxiety, as strong group identification tends to reduce stress and promote the perceived ability to cope. Being a part of a group also affects physical health—strong group identity has been demonstrated to provide physical benefits such as fewer doctor’s visits and faster heart-rate recovery. According to social identity theory, groups can shape individual psychology due to their ability to be internalized into an individual’s sense of self – “I am who I hang out with”. This has come to be known as the “social cure”, whereby individual well-being and health are significantly shaped by a person’s social connections and group memberships.

How does being involved in groups work to promote health? Although researchers do not yet have a complete understanding of the exact mechanisms through which group identification affects well-being, important pathways have been identified. For example, the experience of social support promotes constructive helping between individuals, including both providing and receiving support. This has crucial implications for well-being as it reminds people that they are capable of coping, and thus buffers against negative effects of stressors. Another potential pathway is self-esteem, in that group identification can enhance one’s self-concept as both an individual and group member because there is a sense of belonging, shared values, and common goals.

Recent research done by Greenaway,ĚýHaslam, Cruwys, Branscombe, Ysseldyk, & Heldreth (2015) focused on how group identification can make people feel healthier by increasing feelings of being personally in control. Contrary to the common belief that groups may drain personal control as group members sacrifice their personal needs for the needs of the group, this research demonstrates that groups can actually nurture feelings of personal control in each group member. Perceived personal control is an important resource for mental health, as it predicts positive outcomes such as life satisfaction, motivation, and resilience, while also buffering against unhealthy mental states such as learned helplessness and depression. What this new research demonstrates is that identifying with a group not only directly enhances health and well-being, but also does so by increasing perceptions of personal control over one’s life outcomes.

Simply put, being involved with social groups creates a shared sense of identity, which can increase feelings of personal control and motivation. In other words, groups can help people help themselves. Interestingly, a positive cycle may be set in motion, whereby the more that well-being is improved through social identification, the more motivated people are to pursue further social opportunities, which in turn enhance their well-being. Similarly, as feelings of personal control increase through identifying with groups, it may create an upward spiral of well-being, enabling individuals to increase the quantity and quality of their social connections.

Greenaway and colleagues proposed that individuals can derive feelings of control from group memberships and incorporate them into their self-concept. Through five studies, these researchers examined whether perceived personal control could be derived from group identification, and whether this enhanced control subsequently protected health and well-being.

Consistent results across their studies supported two hypotheses, namely that: (1) identification with a variety of groups was associated with greater perceived personal control, and (2) it was because group identification increased perceived personal control, that it promoted health and well-being . Using a wide range of methods, their results showed that identification with groups (including the academic community, political parties, the nation, and even the human race) wasĚýassociated with greater perceived personal control. Furthermore, perceived personal control accounted for the positive relationship between group identification and well-being. For example, one study demonstrated that during the most stressful time of the year for undergraduate students (submitting their thesis), strongly identifying as being a part of the “academic student group” was associated with greater perceived personal control, lower depression, and greater well-being. Likewise, experimentally increasing how much an individual identified with a certain group led to an increase in perceived personal control and increased well-being, as well as buffering against the detrimental effects of feeling a loss of control.

In general, this research provides support for the counter-intuitive notion that feelings of personal control may be derived from group sources. This leaves the door open for further research to determine whether identifying with important groups also enhances more specific forms of perceived control, such as control over one’s individual health outcomes.

How might we achieve such feelings of control and ultimately enhance our own health and well-being? Such outcomes are more likely when we engage with our social environment, ensure that we have strong social connections, and that we can identify with meaningful social groups. Most importantly, people can proactively grow and reinforce their social group ties over time. Many “social cures” are at our fingertips, such as sports teams, therapy groups, or even just friends. Most social interactions with others are absolutely free, and are at the same time, a highly effective preventative medicine. So want to take control over your health? All the evidence points to eating right, exercising more, and joining a social group.

Based On:

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. Advance online publication.

The originalĚýresearch was supported by the Canadian Institutes for Advanced Research.Ěý

Kid’s ClubĚýImage courtesy of Stuart Miles atĚý

Follow us on !

By Kim Matheson, Department of Health Sciences, ĐÓ°ÉÔ­´´ University

Like many health researchers who are committed to having an impact on human behavior in order to prevent illness, I saw the ‘Nudge’ phenomena as a welcome revelation. And so when a colleague of mine presented a paper at a recent symposium, I, like many others in the room, visibly cringed when he commented that such techniques are paternalistic strategies that assume that people are incapable of making the right decision for themselves.

The thinking behind this assertion is well-stated in a published article by Mols et al. (2014). Certainly not everyone will agree with their thinking, and they make it clear that there are times when a simple nudge is sufficient and necessary to change behaviors. But there are many times when it might not be. Perhaps the motives underlying the behavior are sufficiently complex, and the ‘anti-behavior’ is more aligned with individuals’ goals. Perhaps change occurs when the nudged choice is salient, but disappears when it is not. Perhaps the idea that someone else thought they knew better than me, and tried to trick me into doing something different is sufficiently offensive that I purposely choose otherwise.

So what is a nudge strategy? In effect, a nudge involves a slight push for people to behave in the ‘right’ direction, and is accomplished by making it easier for them to do so. This is accomplished by covertly making certain behavioral choices easier to act on. A simple example is getting children to eat more fruit instead of junk food by putting fruit at the front end of the cafeteria food line. There are many such simple actions where alterations of the environmental, social, or policy conditions, can achieve compliance. The idea is that people aren’t really thinking about what they are doing, or they don’t know how to make good decisions, and so we create the conditions for them to act correctly without having to think.

Not surprisingly, put this way, there are numerous ethical questions raised. Such factors are manipulated all the time for corporate interests – but when such manipulations are directed towards the citizenry by governments or public agencies, this has the capacity to undermine trust, openness, and transparency. It is a paternalistic approach that many would question, as it suggests that even if we knew the evidence supporting the correctness of the behavioral choice, government does not view us as capable of making such a decision on our own. It raises questions regarding what other behaviors might ‘big brother’ like us to engage in that might not be in our collective interests?

So how do we engage citizens so that they make behavioral choices that are in their own and the collective interests? The most recent issue where we see the need to ask this question concerns the vaccination of children against the measles. With recent outbreaks in regions of North America and Europe, real questions have been raised about parents who do not keep their children’s vaccinations up-to-date, if they vaccinate their children at all. As a result, we are seeing the return of diseases that we thought were all but eradicated.

Many accusations have been hurled at anti-vax and vaccine-hesitant parents, ranging from their ignorance for believing data that has been proven to be erroneous (i.e., link to autism), to frightening them into thinking that their own child could become ill and die, to ostracizing and marginalizing them for rendering more vulnerable others in the population susceptible to the illness. What has become clear is that this kind of derogating, blaming, and shaming are more likely to entrench vaccine resistant parents than to encourage behavioral change.

So would a ‘nudge’ in the right direction work in this instance. I haven’t done the research, but it is highly unlikely in most cases. Maybe for the parents who just haven’t gotten around to getting their child vaccinated, setting up vaccine clinics in locations they’re likely to frequent, hence diminishing environmental barriers, might mean that when they and their child are meandering past, they will get their child vaccinated.

But for many other parents, the decision reflects a conscious and thoughtful effort to protect their child. They don’t trust the information they get from the media, they see scientific evidence for what constitutes healthy and unhealthy behaviors and products change on a regular basis (e.g., whether vitamins are good or bad for you; whether you should or should not be consuming fats, dark chocolate, coffee or red wine….). Who trusts government? Or pharma? They may trust the information they get from their doctor, but they might not see their doctor as holding the same values as they themselves – she or he does, afterall, represent the ‘medical establishment’.

Parents trust other like-minded parents. Other people who want the very best for their own children, who want them to be safe and healthy. This isn’t about nudge – indeed, nudge would be an insult, suggesting that they don’t know how to behave thoughtfully about their children. This is about being good parents who value the health of their child, and want to do the best thing. But they have yet to hear from people that they trust, who hold the same criteria to evaluate what is right or wrong, and who can provide them with behavioral alternatives in whichĚýthey can participate.

When health problems are complex, and people are consciously making behavioral choices, health researchers and practitioners need to respect this, and not assume that people are too ignorant to make the right decisions. We need to ask questions. What are their objectives? Which social groups are they looking to in order to determine behavioral options? Which options are consistent with the personal and collective values they espouse, and how can they act on these options? Our best strategy for influencing people to change their behaviors on issues that they care about is to be transparent, respect the social identities that their actions reflect (e.g., being a good parent), identify who they are prepared to listen to in order to evaluate their options, and work together to find ways that allow them to express who they are, and to do the best thing for everyone.

Based on Mols, F., Haslam, S.A., Jetten, J., & Steffens, N. (2014). Why nudge is not enough: A social identity critique of government by stealth. European Journal of Political Research. DOI: 10.1111/1475-6765.12073

Header imageĚýcourtesy of SOMMAI at FreeDigitalPhotos.net
Fruit image courtesy of xedos4 at FreeDigitalPhotos.net