Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology J. Community Appl. Soc. Psychol.

, 21: 419432 (2011)

Published online 2 March 2011 in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) DOI: 10.1002/casp.1084

Intergenerational Practice in the Community: A Focused Ethnographic Evaluation

CHARLOTTE L. ALCOCK1, PAUL M. CAMIC2, CHRIS BARKER3*, CATHERINE HARIDI1 and ROSIE RAVEN1
1 2 3

MAC-UK, London, UK Department of Applied Psychology, Canterbury Christ Church University, Tunbridge Wells, UK Department of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology, University College London, London, UK

ABSTRACT
An intergenerational community intervention based on contact theory and using photovoice methods was designed to change negative age-group stereotypes and promote sense of community. A focused ethnographic approach was adopted. Participants were 18 young people and 13 older adults. Data from focus groups, carried out with each generation separately, and observational eld notes were analysed using thematic analysis; credibility checks were carried out by auditing and respondent validation. Before the intergenerational intervention, both generations presented agegroup stereotypes and both experienced only a weak sense of community. After the intervention, both generations felt that intergenerational contact had reduced age-group stereotypes and enhanced recognition of intergenerational similarity; many also articulated a positive sense of community. The intervention has promise for helping young people and older adults to feel more socially included. Copyright # 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Key words: Intergenerational practice; focused ethnography; photovoice

INTRODUCTION Ageist stereotypes may result in discrimination against both younger and older people, potentially leading to their social exclusion (Granville, 2002). Smaller families, geographical distance between family members and age-segregated activities mean that younger people may lose contact with older generations (Kupetz, 1993). Such lack of intergenerational contact can reinforce negative stereotypes, leading to avoidance of intergenerational contact. The cycle then continues and younger and older people remain isolated from each other and marginalized from society. In Western societies, older adults are negatively stereotyped as being incompetent, irritable, nagging, grouchy, weak and cognitively decient (Cuddy, Norton, & Fiske, 2005;
* Correspondence to: Dr. Chris Barker, Department of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology, University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK. E-mail: c.barker@ucl.ac.uk

Copyright # 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Accepted 6 January 2011

420

C. L. Alcock et al.

Ray & Sharp, 2006). In the UK, it has been suggested that the focus on the reduction of antisocial behaviour has led to an institutionalized mistrust of youth (Kelly, 2003). Stereotypes of both young and old are maintained by lack of access to information that may disconrm or improve negative attitudes. Contact theorists propose that, in order to change ageist stereotypes, different age groups should be brought together in a mutually satisfying manner. According to Hewstone and Browns (1986) contact model, the situation should be intergroup rather than interpersonal for an experience to generalize and the communication should also be a realistic representation of the age group. Building on Hewstone and Brown, Fox and Giles (1993) proposed the Intergenerational Contact Model, which addresses the characteristics of the younger and older participants, whether the contact is intergroup or interpersonal and its social context (e.g. time, space and territory). There are, however, no studies that explicitly use this model, and a lack of theoretically driven research appears to be characteristic of the area more generally (Kuehne, 2003). Approaches to bringing together older and younger generations are known as intergenerational programming (IP). Intergenerational programmes can be long or shortterm, can be implemented in a variety of settings such as schools, universities, care homes, the community, youth organizations and industries (Hatton-Yeo, 2006) and can be familial or non-familial. The major focus of research has been on the impact of IP on childrens attitudes to older adults (e.g. Barton, 1999; Chowdhary et al., 2000; Kassab & Vance, 1999). The results have been equivocal but have suggested that IP can positively inuence young peoples views about older adults. IP has also been found to help prevent young people from engaging in problem behaviours, while helping to promote knowledge, competency and initiative (Zeldin, Larson, Camino, & OConner, 2005). Relatively few IP studies have examined the attitudes of older adults towards younger people (Kuehne, 2003). IP has, however, been reported as a way to address loneliness and isolation, low self-esteem, inadequate support systems and decreased mental and physical activity in older adults (Newman & Smith, 1997). Improvements in intergenerational attitudes during group activities have also been associated with increased frequency of intergenerational contact outside the group (Pinquart, Wenzel, & Sorensen, 2000). Strong relationships between younger and older adults can also be explicitly orientated towards building community and civil society (Sherrod, Flanagan, & Youniss, 2002). Community benets have been reported when young and older people work collaboratively towards a common cause (e.g. Browne, 2005; Kirchner, ODonoghue, & McLaughlin, 2002; Zeldin, 2004; Zeldin et al., 2005). More research is needed, however, to identify the roles that IP can play in community development. IP is carried out in a variety of ways, although the most common has been via arts or drama projects (Newman, Curtis, & Stephens, 2003). The present study also incorporated an arts-based medium (photography). We adapted the photovoice method, a process by which people identify, represent and enhance their community through a specic photographic approach (Wang & Burris, 1997). Photovoice has been successfully implemented in many different populations including urban adults, homeless persons and youth (Strack, Magill, & McDonagh, 2004; Wang, Morrel-Samuels, Hutchison, Bell, & Pestronk, 2004) but has not previously been used as the focus of IP. The present study used ethnographic methods to evaluate an intergenerational photography-based intervention involving younger and older members of an inner-city community. The intervention aimed to promote social inclusion and mental well being and to give both generations a more positive view of each other. The community was
Copyright # 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Community Appl. Soc. Psychol., 21: 419432 (2011) DOI: 10.1002/casp

Intergenerational practice

421

conceptualized as both a physical space, which included several streets, a community centre, public outdoor space, shops and blocks of council-owned ats, and the residents who lived there. The study addressed how participants experienced the intergenerational intervention at the community level and the role of photography in facilitating change in the relationships between younger and older persons.

METHOD Setting The research took place on a London housing estate, with over 2000 residents. The census reported the largest ethnic groups as White British (3540%), African (1015%), White Other (7%), Bangladeshi (510%) and White Irish (510%). The local council owned 8090% of the properties.

Participants Participants were 18 young people (13 boys) and 13 older adults (10 women) recruited from the estate. The young people ranged from 914 years and the older adults from 6580. The older adults were recruited by yers and posters; young people were recruited by word of mouth. Inclusion criteria required participants to be under 16 or over 65 and live in the immediate area. A university ethics committee approved the study.

Intervention Thirty-six sessions, held over 7 months, comprised 28 weekly sessions and eight off-site excursions. A week-by-week breakdown is given in Figure 1. Sessions, which lasted 90 minutes and took place in the estates youth centre, were facilitated by three youth centre staff, one voluntary sector employee and two volunteers. Participants decided on the activities of each session with the support of the group facilitator. The rst two involved each generation attending separately in order to get to know one another. These sessions also involved exploring possible group activities. The older generation expressed an interest in digital photography as they felt that they knew little about it but recognized that it was popular with young people who used it through their mobile phones. This information was fed back to the younger generation who reported that they enjoyed taking photographs but did not know how to edit their work. A common interest in photography was established and it was agreed that photography would be the

Figure 1.
Copyright # 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Project timeline.
J. Community Appl. Soc. Psychol., 21: 419432 (2011) DOI: 10.1002/casp

422

C. L. Alcock et al.

focus of the intergenerational group. Sessions 411 continued with each generation attending separately, allowing participants to become acquainted with their own age group and to prepare for intergenerational working. Participants began to familiarize themselves with photography, practicing with disposable cameras. In sessions 1215, the two generations were brought together for the rst time and did ice-breaker activities to get to know each other. Sessions 1634 were photography-based and formed the main part of the intervention. They were facilitated by a professional photographer. Participants learnt how to use a digital camera and edit their work on a computer. They selected their estate as the focus of their work, choosing to focus on its past, present and future. Sessions 18 and 19 were non-photography focused but involved a younger and older persons writing to each other. The letters were anonymous and gave each generation the opportunity to ask questions of the other. An exhibition of the groups photographic work took place at the estate community centre in week 35. The borough mayoress and members of the council as well as participants, family and friends attended. The nal session in week 36 involved a second focus group for each generation. Two participants discontinued due to parents who worried about their children meeting other children who might be undesirable company. New members were welcomed throughout the group, creating challenges for data analysis, but more closely mirroring the reality of community-based programmes. Tables 1 and 2 provide information on the participants and their level of involvement.

Data collection A focused ethnographic approach informed data collection (Chambers, 2000; Savage, 2006), within an overarching case study framework (Yin, 2009). This is a variation of the traditional ethnographic approach characterized by shorter times in the eld focused on a
Table 1. Part. ID YP1 YP2 YP3 YP4 YP5 YP6 YP7 YP8 YP9 YP10 YP11 YP12 YP13 YP14 YP15 YP16 YP17 YP18 Young person demographics and research participation information Age 79 79 79 1314 1012 79 1012 79 1012 1012 1012 1012 1012 10 10 12 10 10 Gender M F F M M M M M M M F F F M M M M M Ethnicity Black British North African Black other White British White British White British Black other White British Black British Black British White British Black other Black other White British White British White British Black Caribbean Black Caribbean Sessions attended 1824 2536 2536 2536 2536 2536 2536 110 1824 1117 2536 110 110 110 110 1824 1824 1824 Foc. Grp 1 Yes Y Y Y No Y Y Y Y Y N Y Y Y Y N N N Foc. Grp 2 Y Y Y Y Y Y N N N N N N N N N N N N

Copyright # 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

J. Community Appl. Soc. Psychol., 21: 419432 (2011) DOI: 10.1002/casp

Intergenerational practice
Table 2. Older person demographics and participation information Part. ID OA1 OA2 OA3 OA4 OA5 OA6 OA7 OA8 OA9 OA10 OA11 OA12 OA13 Age 7075 7680 7075 6569 6569 7680 7680 7680 7680 7680 7680 7680 7680 Gender F F F F M M M F F F F F F Ethnicity White other White British White other White British Black other Black other White British White British White other White other White other White British White British Sessions attended 2536 2536 110 110 1117 1824 1117 1117 2536 110 1117 814 814 Foc. Grp 1 Y Y Y Y Y Y N N N N N N N

423

Foc. Grp 2 Y Y N N N N Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

specic issue (Knoblauch, 2005). Several characteristics of ethnography make it suitable for evaluating intergenerational practice in the community: naturalistic location, focus on the participants perspective and researchers personally involved in the research (Ward, 1999). In addition, it is suited to advancing community research due to its multi-method approach and attention to context, while giving voice to individual experience (Miller, Hengst, & Wang, 2003). Focus groups. Focus groups enable researchers to examine peoples different perspectives as they operate within a social network (Kitzinger & Barbour, 1999) and can shift the balance of power to participants (Kitzinger, 1994; Mayall, 1993), an important consideration in a study promoting social inclusion. The groups, lasting about an hour, were conducted at the beginning and end of the intervention, with both generations separately. Both focus groups elicited each generations perception of the other and their community; the second focus groups also elicited participants experiences of the intergenerational project. If a participant did not attend the initial focus group, but spoke about his/her pre-project experiences during the second focus group, these data were included in the initial themes. Groups were recorded and transcribed. Field notes. Field notes are integral to ethnography, recording the regular, systematic observations made in the eld (Emerson, Fretz, & Shaw, 1995). Rough notes were made during project meetings and then formally written up. The rst author collected these data in collaboration with two research consultants who volunteered at the youth centre; they were 16 and 50 years old and their respective ages map onto the intergenerational focus of the project. Spradleys (1980) eld note checklist was used to focus observations, and the consultants were given training and supervision in the ethnographic approach; they took notes during sessions and their observations were regularly discussed with researchers.

Analytic procedure Focus group transcripts were analysed using thematic analysis (Strauss & Corbin, 1990), which aim to develop progressively more abstract conceptual categories to synthesize and explain the data and the relationships between them. In the present analysis, focus group text was summarized at different conceptual levels in the form of margin codes, codes,
Copyright # 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Community Appl. Soc. Psychol., 21: 419432 (2011) DOI: 10.1002/casp

424

C. L. Alcock et al.

categories and themes (Whittington & Burns, 2005). Combining eld notes with the focus group transcripts facilitated a process of triangulation (Hammersley & Atkinson, 1995). A negative case analysis stance was also adopted to ensure that the impact of any minority viewpoints was explored in relation to the majority themes. To ensure that the generated themes reected participants experiences, credibility checks of the analysis were carried out (Barker & Pistrang, 2005) by two other researchers. Respondent validation was gained by the rst author verbally feeding back to the participants the nal themes; this was done separately with each generation. The older adults engaged well with this process, agreeing with the themes and reporting that they felt proud of what the project had achieved while younger people seemed less interested and neither agreed nor disagreed. This process aimed to achieve testimonial validity (Lincoln & Guba, 1985).

RESULTS Main themes Analysis of the focus group data and eld notes generated 12 themes. The rst set (initial themes) were determined from focus groups and eld notes before the intervention began while the second (concluding themes) were drawn from the focus groups at the end of the intervention and from eld notes that were taken throughout. Three of the initial themes related to intergenerational social exclusion and described negative age-group stereotypes held by both generations; the remaining ones related to sense of community. Three of the concluding themes concerned intergenerational social inclusion and renewed understanding of the other generation; two others related to companionship. The remaining theme described facilitators of change that operated throughout the intervention. The themes are described below, illustrated with quotations from focus groups and eld notes. All names have been changed to ensure condentiality. Notations are as follows: FG1 rst focus groups; FG2 second focus groups; FN, 14 eld notes written by researcher in week 14; FN-RC, 15 eld notes by a research consultant in week 15; YP1 young person number 1; OA9 older adult number 9.

Initial themes Intergenerational social exclusion: Negative and stereotyped perceptions of the other generation. Older adults as incapable and unkempt (YP). In the rst focus group, young peoples descriptions of older adults focused on declining physical appearance. There was much laughter and gesturing when the children spoke. They used a number of pejorative words, suggesting that they saw older people dependent and needy, in cognitive decline and having poor personal care:
Every time an old man comes near a bus you can smell it, they smell of pee. (FG1, YP11)

The young peoples description evoked a sense of older adults social exclusion. They felt that they were nancially poor and either lived on the streets or in an old peoples home. Only one young person used interpersonal descriptors of older people as reliable and one felt that they were kind because they give you sweets.
Copyright # 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Community Appl. Soc. Psychol., 21: 419432 (2011) DOI: 10.1002/casp

Intergenerational practice

425

Younger people as trouble makers (OA and YP). The older adults saw young people as different to them both in the past and present. There was divided opinion about whether these differences were positive or negative:
. . .we were brought up under Victorian rule. You know you werent allowed to speak unless you were spoken to or had permission to speak. But today I mean, thank God all thats ended. Children can say what they like. (FG1, OA2)

A number of negative observations of young peoples behaviour further indicated that the general perception was less positive:
Im not labelling them all together, of course not, but you dont really know at the beginning what to expect. Cos I mean unfortunately we read and hear a lot of things in the media which are not very, you know pleasant, but. . . (FG2, OA7)

It appeared that both the media and personal experience were signicant in the older adults schemas of young people. Some of the young people anticipated that this would be the case:
I thought. . .that they see us [YP] as a threat because you see older people getting mugged all the time on the news and stuff like that. They automatically have a prototype that were just kind of bad, in every way. (FG1, YP4)

Beliefs about what the other generation likes doing (OA & YP). Another belief that emerged was that older people did not do very much and it appeared to be shared by most of the group who nodded their heads as their peers spoke:
Theyre like, just sit down and lie down. They dont need work. . .they daydream (FG2, YP6)

A further understanding presented by the young people was that older peoples activities varied according to gender: The women did sewing and the men watched football. The young people also reported that older men drink a lot of alcohol. The older people also described alcohol as an activity enjoyed by younger people. With the exception of computers, the use of alcohol and substances coloured their perception of young peoples pastimes. This was a strong theme shared by everyone and was indicated by the nodding and shaking of heads. Social and personal sense of community. Meaning of community (YP & OA). The meaning of community was similar for both generations who understood that it referred to support and a place where you know other people:
A place where you know each other. . .and you can rely on them, like, so Can you look after my house keys? and you know that they wont, like, go into your house and steal everything. (FG1, YP2)

Positive sense of community. Through self reports, the younger people seemed to have more of a sense of community at the beginning than the older adults. When sense of community was present, it was inuenced by external factors. One young person identied the youth club as helping her to feel a part of her community, for example, and one older person described joining a local committee:
Well I try to be involved in the community as in going to Safer Neighbourhoods, having a walk round with the patch manager. . .yes it does [help my sense of community] (FG1, OA4)

Lack of community (OA & YP). Some of the young people reported that they did not feel part of their community but the majority was unable to articulate why. A couple
Copyright # 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Community Appl. Soc. Psychol., 21: 419432 (2011) DOI: 10.1002/casp

426

C. L. Alcock et al.

suggested that it might be due to anonymity but it was unclear whether this was shared by the others in the group:
. . .our community at a time knows us as, like, the girl from 15B. Thats why its weird. Not for me, ya, but the girl from 15B. (FG1, YP12)

The older people were unanimous that they did not feel a sense of community. There was a sense of loss regarding community, a feeling that it had dissipated over the years:
Well, I dont think now theres very much of community or neighbourhoodness. Its all gone. (FG1, OA4)

Concluding themes Intergenerational social inclusion: Understanding of the other generation. Intergenerational acceptance: Coming to accept each other. In the initial focus groups neither generation expressed strong anticipatory feelings about working together. The young people merely verbalized curiosity about why older people were involved. The eld note observations were more revealing than the focus group and suggested that the older adults might have been reluctant to give up their existing group to incorporate the young people:
. . .most [older adults] seemed nonplussed. . .they just asked about the logistics i.e. time, location but nothing about working with the younger ones. They did not seem bothered but neither did they seem happy or enthusiastic. . . (FN-RC, 15)

In the rst few intergenerational sessions, the tendency of the young people was to ignore the older adults. This changed over time as evidenced by the use of space at the youth centre:
It was like two groups in the beginning wasnt it? The kids came in and they went straight to the tables and the older people were here and they walked straight past. Whereas later on, the youngsters rst sat here with the older people and started discussing and then theyd play, and later on move on to the tables. (FG2, RC)

Alienation existed between the two generations at the beginning but this lessened through contact between the two generations and allowed the testing of stereotypes and prejudices:
Um, by letting me see what they [OA] can and what they do, how they act, and nothing really else. . .Um, Ive learnt that theres no difference between the people, older people and young people, just that their looks change. (FG2, YP1) Ive learnt that were actually quite the same as older people that weve got stereotypes of them and theyve got stereotypes of us. . . if we actually forgot about those stereotypes and got to know each other as individuals then wed get over the old problem (FG2, YP5)

One older person who attended fewer sessions disagreed that she had gelled with the young people providing a counter theme that was articulated by nearly all:
I didnt nd any gelling with the children here. I dont think that came off me really. (FG2, OA8)

The same was also true for one of the younger people who made less effort in the sessions to integrate with the older people; he recognized this to be the case and actually felt that his lack of participation made things worse:
Copyright # 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Community Appl. Soc. Psychol., 21: 419432 (2011) DOI: 10.1002/casp

Intergenerational practice

427

Its helped. . . um break them down [age barriers], certain people that have actually spoke to the older lot, but um. . .the people that havent really spent time with the older lot like myself. (FG2, YP5)

Intergenerational learning: Learning from each other. As well as learning to accept each other, participants were able to learn from each other. One older lady told the young people how she went to school on a pony. In turn, the young people were able to share stories about their lives today and teach the older people new skills:
And we have been like showing each other how to play games. . .like pool, table tennis. Like some of them are really good at it and some of them. . .they dont really know how to do stuff like that. . . (FG2, YP2)

Intergenerational caring: Sense of giving to the other generation (OA & YP). Older adults felt that the project provided an opportunity to contribute positively to young peoples lives and this was articulated with great emotion and a sense of pride in helping younger people from the community:
What attracted me very much when you look at the environment we live in today, and how these children behave here, that it must do them good for now and for the future. (FG2, OA7)

In contrast to the older adults, the young people did not vocally reciprocate such a feeling but it was evident in their behaviour. The community research consultant noted:
Alex [YP] spotted that Iris [OA] had left her bag in my car and was quite concerned. I promised to give it to Gladys so she could give it to Iris and he seemed satised. (FN-RC, 19) As we went into the engine room [on excursion], Rose [OA] tells us that her hands are cold. Tom [YP] goes over to her and rubs them to help them to warm. (FN, 31)

Social and personal sense of community. Positive sense of community (OA & YP). There was a notable change for the older adults regarding positive sense of community. The general feeling of isolation was less evident, superseded by a feeling of being noticed and valued. The young people spoke to them outside of the group and this was considered very positive:
. . .what surprised me was, when I was outside, little things came up to me, and said Hello, we saw you at the centre or weve seen you somewhere else. And not only did they introduce themselves, they introduced their family and one boy had the cheek to introduce his dog. . .its better. . . its more a community sort of thing because theyre talking to me outside. . .(FG2, OA8)

The young people did not talk about meeting the older people outside of the group, possibly because they did not see this as signicant; it had become part of everyday life. What seemed more evident was the development of a sense of community pride. This was particularly evident at the photographic exhibition:
The young people were proud to show their parents and friends from the estate what they had been doing. . .a couple of them commented that they felt that their estate had become really important because the Mayoress had visited. (FN, 36)

Companionship (OA). The older people also gained companionship from the group, through meeting younger people and each other. The former felt particularly unique:
. . .you dont have cause to mix with children a great deal do you, young children? School teachers do, or parents do but people like myself that, you know. . . (FG2, OA7)
Copyright # 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Community Appl. Soc. Psychol., 21: 419432 (2011) DOI: 10.1002/casp

428

C. L. Alcock et al.

There was also a feeling that the group gave the older adults a purpose and something towards which to look forward:
When you come here you forget your problems. . .you know. . .you feel better (FG2, OA11)

Facilitators of change. The camera as mediator for interaction. Talking to the photograph was a great ice-breaker when the groups rst came together as it provided a tool through which to share experiences to date:
The new older adults looked at some of the photos that had been taken in previous weeks and unanimously commented that they were good photos. Gladys [OA] looked very proud and explained that she had learned how to use a digital camera. (FN, 31)

Photography also provided a shared learning goal; all participants were starting from the same place and could support each other in learning how to use a digital camera and edit photographs. There was a sense of surprised empowerment that came from being involved in the photographic process. The camera provided a non-verbal tool, which facilitated discussion that might not otherwise have taken place. When photographing the negative things in their community, for example, a young person said that they wanted to photograph noise. The older adults working in that group looked surprised and told the young people that they thought it was them that was making all of the noise. The young people said that they hated it because it kept them awake at night. A discussion then ensued about how to photograph noise; this allowed the opportunity for the two generations to create something together whilst also breaking down a misconception about problem noise on the estate. DISCUSSION Before the intervention, a number of age-group stereotypes were described by all participants. Young people often felt that older adults opinions about them were moulded by mainstream media rather than by personal contact, consistent with the literature suggesting lack of contact between generations leads to reliance on age-group stereotypes and the media (Moore & Statham, 2006). During the project there was evidence that participants gained an awareness of their reliance on age-group stereotypes and, as a result, were able to change their perception of the other generation. This came about through learning about each other and from each other, contributing to each generations understanding of how they could offer mutual value (Erikson, Erikson, & Kivnick, 1986). It was also consistent with aspects of contact theory (Rothbart & John, 1985) in that mutual cooperation between generations was observed to occur more regularly and more easily as the project progressed, which led to reported positive changes in how the groups perceived each other. Another outcome was a change in community-level participation which now saw older adults having the opportunity to pass values and life skills to the young. This was particularly salient because our sample of older adults had long thought that young people were not interested in what they had to contribute. Another change in community-level participation was how the young people demonstrated a sense of responsibility and caring towards the older people, also suggesting that their sense of initiative and competency was promoted during the intervention (Zeldin et al., 2005).
Copyright # 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Community Appl. Soc. Psychol., 21: 419432 (2011) DOI: 10.1002/casp

Intergenerational practice

429

The project also led to increased intergenerational contact outside the group. This was evident through reports from the older adults of being introduced to the young peoples families and dogs on the estate. More generally, there was suggestion of an intergenerational sense of pride at the end-of-project exhibition, with both generations recognizing that they had worked towards community improvement (Zeldin et al., 2005) and were proud of the results. Some of the young people initially displayed challenging, antisocial behaviour but this reduced with time, consistent with previous reports that IP can help prevent young people from engaging in problem behaviours (Zeldin et al., 2005). Photography helped to bring the two generations together by providing the common goal of learning and practicing it. In so doing, it served as a medium through which stereotypes could be disconrmed as it provided an activity with which both generations were inexperienced and unfamiliar. A common goal and mutual levels of knowledge are thought to be essential for intergenerational attitude change (Hewstone & Brown, 1986). Learning how to use the camera became an immediate joining point. It was a tool that both generations valued, sharing information about its features and, at times, jointly documenting their neighbourhood and community life. An unexpected nding was that both generations raised concerns in the focus groups regarding the other generations alcohol consumption. Whilst this might have been predictable amongst older adults due to media portrayal of under-age drinking, this was less predictable for young people towards older adults. It is possible that this concern stemmed from young peoples experiences at home but this was not addressed in the present study. Applied ethnography faces three areas of methodological criticism: representation, legitimization and praxis (Chambers, 2000; Gibbon, 2002). In terms of representation, critics note that experience is created in the text written by the researcher. The crisis of legitimization centres on critiques of the rigor, validity, reliability and generalizability of ethnographic approaches. Finally, praxis emerges out of challenges regarding the implications of shifting from passive and objective observation to more action-, participatory- and activist-orientated strategies (Suzuki, Ahluwalia, Mattis, & Quizon, 2005). These factors remained in the forefront of our thinking throughout the research, particularly when writing eld notes, in which ethnographers have as a primary goal description rather than analysis. All descriptions are, however, selectively purposed, angled and voiced (Emerson et al., 1995). Notes portray the setting, participants and actions, rather than offer causal explanations or build an argument. We were aware that in writing eld notes we created the described scene and that every eld note mirrored our choices. This study adhered to the general guidelines of best practice in qualitative research in community psychology (Barker & Pistrang, 2005). There were, however, a number of limitations related to sampling. Firstly, due to time and resource limitations, recruitment was in English, potentially excluding participants from minority ethnic backgrounds. It was also signicant that the majority of young people were male, the majority of older adults were female. Secondly, there may be differences between those who chose to attend the group and those who declined. Those who declined possibly did so due to their social exclusion, problem severity or views of the other generation. It is possible, therefore, that the sample presented less severe difculties than was representative of the general population on the estate.
Copyright # 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Community Appl. Soc. Psychol., 21: 419432 (2011) DOI: 10.1002/casp

430

C. L. Alcock et al.

Conclusions The links between mental health and social exclusion are well established in the literature and the present ndings provide further support for young people and older adults vulnerability to exclusion from wider society and each other. The ndings suggest that community-based IP may be able to promote social inclusion and increase sense of community and, therefore, has potential in the prevention of mental health problems. This study is a rst step in evaluating community-based intergenerational programmes. In the UK, there has been a recent emphasis on multi-disciplinary and multi-agency working. This is essential for intergenerational practice, which might draw on professionals from the arts, health and community sectors (Camic, 2008), and underlines the need for exibility in service structure, both in terms of physical locality and resource allocation. A service where mental health practitioners partner with community groups and voluntary organizations may be the ideal setting for innovative approaches in preventative mental health to develop.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We are grateful to the Groundwork organization, in particular to Shazia Khadim and Lois Titmas, for helping to get the project going, and of course to all of the participants, young and old.

REFERENCES
Barker, C., & Pistrang, N. (2005). Quality criteria under methodological pluralism: Implications for doing and evaluating research. American Journal of Community Psychology, 35, 201 212. Barton, H. (1999). Effects of an intergenerational programme on the attitudes of emotionally disturbed youth toward the elderly. Educational Gerontology, 25, 623640. Browne, B. (2005). Imagine Chicago: A methodology for cultivating community. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 14, 394405. Camic, P. M. (2008). Playing in the mud: Health psychology, the arts and innovative approaches to healthcare. Journal of Health Psychology, 13, 287298. Chambers, E. (2000). Applied ethnography. In N. K. Denzin, & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (second edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Chowdhary, U., Schultz, C. M., Hasselris, P., Kujath, H. A., Penn, D., & Henson, S. (2000). Intergenerating activities and aging appreciation of elementary school children. Educational Gerontology, 26, 541565. Cuddy, A. J. C., Norton, M., & Fiske, S. T. (2005). This old stereotype: The pervasiveness and persistence of the elderly stereotype. Journal of Social Issues, 61, 267285. Emerson, R. Fretz, R. & Shaw L. (Eds.). (1995). Writing ethnographic eldnotes. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Erikson, E. H., Erikson, J., & Kivnick, H. Q. (1986). Vital involvement in old age. New York: Norton. Fox, S., & Giles, H. (1993). Accommodating intergenerational contact: A critique and theoretical model. Journal of Aging Studies, 7, 423451. Gibbon, M. (2002). Doing a doctorate using participatory action research framework in the context of community health. Qualitative Health Research, 12, 546558. Granville, G. (2002). A review of intergenerational practice in the UK. Available: http://www.centreforip.org.uk [7 May 2007]. Hammersley, M., & Atkinson, P. (1995). Ethnography: Principles and practice. London: Routledge.
Copyright # 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Community Appl. Soc. Psychol., 21: 419432 (2011) DOI: 10.1002/casp

Intergenerational practice

431

Hatton-Yeo, A. (2006). Intergenerational programmes: An introduction and examples of practice. Stoke on Trent: Centre for Intergenerational Practice. Available: http://www.centreforip.org.uk [7 May 2007]. Hewstone, M. & Brown R. (Eds.). (1986). Contact and conict in intergroup encounters. Oxford, U.K: Blackwell. Kassab, C., & Vance, L. (1999). An assessment of the effectiveness of an intergenerational program for youth. Psychological Reports, 84, 198200. Kelly, P. (2003). Growing up as risky business? Risks, surveillance and the institutionalised mistrust of youth. Journal of Youth Studies, 6, 165180. Kirchner, B. ODonoghue, J. & McLaughlin M. (Eds.). (2002). Youth participation: Improving institutions and communities. New directions in youth development, 96. San Francisco: JosseyBass. Kitzinger, J. (1994). The methodology of focus groups: The importance of interaction between research participants. Sociology of Health and Illness, 16, 103121. Kitzinger, J., & Barbour, R. (1999). Introduction: The challenge and promise of focus groups. In R. Barbour, & J. Kitzinger (Eds.), Developing focus group research: Politics, theory and practice. London: Sage Publications. Knoblauch, H. (2005). Focused ethnography. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 6 (3), Art. 44. Available: http://www.qualtiative-research.net/fqs-texte/3-05/053-44-e.htm [4 June 2009]. Kuehne, V. (2003). The state of our art: Intergenerational program research and evaluation: Part two. Journal of Intergenerational Relationships, 1, 7994. Kupetz, B. N. (1993). Bridging the gap between young and old. Children Today, 22, 1013. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Mayall, B. (1993). Keeping healthy at home and school: Its my body so its my job. Sociology of Health and Illness, 15, 464487. Miller, P. J., Hengst, J. A., & Wang, S. (2003). Ethnographic methods: Applications from developmental cultural psychology. In P. M. Camic, R. E. Rhodes, & L. Yardley (Eds.), Qualitative research in psychology: Expanding perspectives in methodology and design (pp. 219242). Washington, DC: APA. Moore, S., & Statham, E. (2006). Can intergenerational practice offer a way of limiting anti-social behaviour and fear of crime? The Howard Journal, 45, 468484. Newman, S., & Smith, T. B. (1997). Developmental theories as the basis for intergenerational programmes. In S. Newman, C. R. Ward, T. B. Smith, J. O. Wilson, & J. M. McCrea (Eds.), Intergenerational Programmes: Past, present and future. Washington: Taylor & Francis. Newman, T., Curtis, K., & Stephens, J. (2003). Do community-based arts projects result in social gains? A review of the literature. Community Development Journal, 38, 310322. Pinquart, M., Wenzel, S., & Sorensen, S. (2000). Changes in attitudes among children and elderly adults in intergenerational group work. Educational Gerontology, 26, 523540. Ray, S., & Sharp, E. (2006). Ageism: A benchmark of public attitudes in Britain. Age Concern, UK. Rothbart, M., & John, O. P. (1985). Social categorization and behavioral episodes: A cognitive analysis of the effects of intergroup contact. Journal of Social Issues, 41, 81104. Savage, J. (2006). Ethnographic evidence: The value of applied ethnography in healthcare. Journal of Research in Nursing, 11, 383393. Sherrod, L. R., Flanagan, C., & Youniss, J. (2002). Dimensions of citizenship and opportunities for youth development. Applied Developmental Science, 6, 264272. Spradley, J. P. (1980). Participant observation. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. Strack, R. W., Magill, C., & McDonagh, K. (2004). Engaging youth through photovoice. Health Promotion Practice, 5, 4958. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. London: Sage. Suzuki, L., Ahluwalia, M., Mattis, J., & Quizon, C. (2005). Ethnography in counseling psychology research: Possibilities for application. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52, 206214. Wang, C. C., & Burris, M. (1997). Photovoice: Concept, methodology, and use for participatory needs assessment. Health Education and Behaviour, 24, 369387.

Copyright # 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

J. Community Appl. Soc. Psychol., 21: 419432 (2011) DOI: 10.1002/casp

432

C. L. Alcock et al.

Wang, C. C., Morrel-Samuels, S., Hutchison, P., Bell, L., & Pestronk, R. M. (2004). Flint photovoice: Community building among youth, adults, and policy makers. American Journal of Public Health, 94, 911913. Ward, C. (1999). The intergenerational eld needs more ethnographic research. In V. Kuehne (Ed.), Intergenerational programs: Understanding what we have created. New York: The Haworth Press. Whittington, A., & Burns, J. (2005). The dilemmas of residential care staff working with the challenging behaviour of people with learning disabilities. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 44, 5976. Yin, R. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (fourth edition). London: Sage. Zeldin, S. (2004). Preventing youth violence through the promotion of community engagement and membership. Journal of Community Psychology, 32, 623641. Zeldin, S., Larson, R., Camino, L., & OConnor, C. (2005). Intergenerational relationships and partnerships in community programmes: Purpose, practice and directions for research. Journal of Community Psychology, 33, 110.

Copyright # 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

J. Community Appl. Soc. Psychol., 21: 419432 (2011) DOI: 10.1002/casp

Copyright of Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology is the property of John Wiley & Sons, Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.