The British Academy has published a working party report highlighting the importance of social science to policy making in relation to families. Chaired by Sir Michael Rutter of the Institute of Psychiatry, the working party was dominated by psychologists: Professor Jay Belsky of Birkbeck, University of London; Professor Judith Dunn of the Institute of Psychiatry; Dr Brian D'Onofrio at Indiana University; Professor Terrie Moffitt of Duke University and the Institute of Psychiatry; and Professor Frances Gardner of the University of Oxford. Other members had expertise in economics and law.

Entitled Social Science and Family Policies, the 184-page report provides an authoritative, up-to-date overview of research in several areas, including: the effects of family break-up; abuse and neglect; resilience; non-parental child care; institutional deprivation; interventions such as Sure Start; the effects of drugs and alcohol; and the
roles of communities.

The tone is upbeat. The 'social/ behavioural sciences are now riding high with a range of most ingenious techniques available to tackle complex and difficult questions,' the report says. Interventions such as parenting programmes can be beneficial, it argues, but common sense isn't a good enough guide to what works. Well-intentioned programmes can be ineffective or even harmful, as in the case of the Cambridge-Somerville delinquency intervention. 'Policy-makers need to appreciate that there is no disgrace in having an intervention that does not work,' the report says. '...What is a disgrace is to persist with interventions that have been shown to be ineffective or even harmful.'

While recognising that it is for policy makers to choose which values to champion and which problems to prioritise, the report illustrates why policy makers need social science - for example, to demonstrate when the same factors can have different effects on different people; to provide evidence on the likely effectiveness of policy choices; to help distinguish between cause and correlation, and to identify bi-directional causal relationships.

Elsewhere, the report highlights the importance of replicating findings and drawing on multiple methodologies. The Dunedin study in particular has shown the benefits of a multidisciplinary approach in relation to gene - environment interactions and resilience. Maltreatment can lead to increased risk for antisocial behaviour and depression, but the level of risk depends on a child's genotype. And the effects are highly specific. Different genes are implicated for depression and for antisocial behaviour. 'Social and behavioural scientists must be prepared to collaborate with biological scientists in order to examine key questions,' the report says.

Whilst 'policy-makers need social sciences', the social sciences in turn depend on funding. 'Good commissioning requires an understanding of multiple methods of analysis ... particularly on a topic as complex as the way in which parenting works,' the report says. 'Progress often means addressing enduring social problems by means of interventions that take time to establish and evaluate.' The report also warns against investing exclusively in tried and tested methodologies. 'What is needed,' the report concludes, 'is a balanced portfolio of low, medium and high risk research. With respect to the last, we wish to emphasise the need to reward creative, innovative thinking if it carries the potential for moving things forward in a dramatic way.'

Sir Michael Rutter, a Fellow of the British Academy, said: 'Social scientists and politicians have distinct, but equally important roles. This new report sets out what those are and examines how these two professions can work together to create successful policies for families and young people.'

--Christian Jarret

Dr Essi Viding, a developmental psychologist from University College London, has been named by the British Academy and Wiley-Blackwell as the winner of the 2010 Wiley Prize.
The Academy's Wiley Prize in Psychology, worth £5000, was created in 2009 as an annual award to recognise outstanding contributions in a field of psychology. The prize alternates annually between 'lifetime achievement' and 'outstanding promise', and for the first time this year it rewards research by a UK-based psychologist within five years of receipt of doctorate whose research and achievements show exceptional promise.

Dr Viding's work brings together genetics, social development and cognitive neuroscience in innovative ways to explore the causes of violent antisocial behaviour in young people. She was appointed Reader in Developmental Psychopathology at UCL in 2008 and is heavily committed to translating her basic science findings into practice with advisory
roles for school-based interventions and government policy.

On receiving the award, Dr Viding said: 'It is a great honour that the British Academy and Wiley-Blackwell have recognised the research I conduct with my team and collaborators. I have been fortunate that UCL have strongly supported my early career development. This prize is also a testament to the wonderful mentoring I have been lucky to receive throughout my career.'

--Jon Sutton

The Psychology Department at the University of Kent has launched a new Child Development Unit jointly headed up by the psychologists Dr Kirsten Abbot-Smith, Professor Adam Rutland and Dr Erika Nurmsoo. The unit will run experiments on children aged between 12 months and 10 years, with a particular focus on language, cognitive development and group behaviour. Other unit members include Dr Lindsey Cameron and BPS members Professor Dominic Abrams and Dr Mike Forrester.

Key questions the unit aims to answer include: How do children learn their first language? How do children decide who to learn from? Why and when do they learn from their peers? and How do young children learn conversational conventions?

The department has created a new child-friendly entrance, waiting area and testing rooms for the Unit. Abbot-Smith (pictured) and Nurmsoo, both of whom have experience of research with pre-school age children, are newly recruited and two new Tobil eye-trackers, one for use in the Unit and one for use in schools, have been purchased.

'The main advantage to having a dedicated child unit,' Abbot-Smith told us, 'is that a researcher can test children in the lab, rather than in schools or nurseries. Our lab testing environment is quiet, which cannot be said of most schools and certainly
not of nurseries! Lastly, when using certain types of equipment, such as eye-trackers, it is really a lot easier to keep the equipment in place, using particular settings, than to have to drag it all over town.'

The most difficult challenge for a new child development unit, Abbot-Smith said, is recruitment of children. 'The most effective methods we've found are speaking to parents one-to-one in situations where they are not stressed out, so avoid parent-toddler groups. Examples include approaching parents in queues for the National Childcare Trust Nearly New Sales (held twice a year in most English towns), and having a stall in the town centre. Both of the latter involve having at least three "recruiters" present - also to help carry all the leaflets etc down - so that usually means me going as well. When in the town centre, one of us wears a rabbit costume so that toddlers drag their parents over to us.'

--Christian Jarrett

What implications do existing and future findings in brain science have for society and ethics? The Royal Society plans to find out via a new 'Brain Waves' project, to be chaired by Professor Colin Blakemore of the University of Oxford.

The project will take place in five modules, the first of which will focus on implications for public policy and report this autumn. Psychologists and BPS members are well represented on the project's main steering group and on the working groups for the various modules. Indeed, the second module on neuroscience, education and lifelong learning is chaired by BPS Fellow Professor Uta Frith; the third module on neuroscience, conflict and arms control is chaired by BPS Fellow Professor Robbins, and the fourth on neuroscience, responsibility and the law is chaired by former British Psychological Society President's Award Winner Professor Nicholas Mackintosh. The final module 'Lessons for the governance of novel areas of science and new technologies', which aims to bring together findings from modules one to four, is due to conclude in summer 2011.

Professor Blakemore said that advances in our understanding of the brain are helping improve treatments for neurodegenerative disease and mental illnesses, and will also increase our insights into normal human behaviour and mental well-being. 'We need to do something that scientists usually don't like to do - to speculate about the future,' Blakemore said. 'There's a lot to think about and we must begin now the process of providing the best possible information in areas of public policy such as health, education, law and security. Progress in neuroscience is going to throw up all sorts of questions about personality, identity, responsibility and liberty. We need to be prepared to answer and respond to those questions.'

--Christian Jarrett

For further information e-mail science.policy@royalsociety.org