ObjectivesThis study aimed to assess the degree to which the ‘social cure’ model of psychosocial health captures the understandings and experiences of healthcare staff and patients in a social prescribing (SP) pathway and the degree to which these psychosocial processes predict the effect of the pathway on healthcare usage.DesignMixed-methods: Study 1: semistructured interviews; study 2: longitudinal survey.SettingAn English SP pathway delivered between 2017 and 2019.ParticipantsStudy 1: general practitioners (GPs) (n=7), healthcare providers (n=9) and service users (n=19). Study 2: 630 patients engaging with SP pathway at a 4-month follow-up after initial referral assessment.InterventionChronically ill patients experiencing loneliness referred onto SP pathway and meeting with a health coach and/or link worker, with possible further referral to existing or newly created relevant third-sector groups.Main outcome measureStudy 1: health providers and users’ qualitative perspectives on the experience of the pathway and social determinants of health. Study 2: patients’ primary care usage.ResultsHealthcare providers recognised the importance of social factors in determining patient well-being, and reason for presentation at primary care. They viewed SP as a potentially effective solution to such problems. Patients valued the different social relationships they created through the SP pathway, including those with link workers, groups and community. Group memberships quantitatively predicted primary care usage, and this was mediated by increases in community belonging and reduced loneliness.ConclusionsMethodological triangulation offers robust conclusions that ‘social cure’ processes explain the efficacy of SP, which can reduce primary care usage through increasing social connectedness (group membership and community belonging) and reducing loneliness. Recommendations for integrating social cure processes into SP initiatives are discussed.

Current research on social integration and mental health operationalizes social integration as frequency of interactions and participation in social activities (i.e., social contact). This neglects the subjective dimension of social integration, namely group identification. We present two studies comparing the effect exerted by social contact and group identification on mental health (e.g., depression, stress) across two different groups (family; army unit), demonstrating that group identification predicts mental health better than social contact. Methodologically, our findings show the necessity to include group identification measures as indicators of social integration, in empirical research; theoretically, they support social identity researchers' contention that group identification is a central mechanism in the processes leading from social integration to health.

Objectives This paper investigates the interplay between group identification (i.e., the extent to which one has a sense of belonging to a social group, coupled with a sense of commonality with in‐group members) and four types of health behaviour, namely physical exercise, smoking, drinking, and diet. Specifically, we propose a positive relationship between one's number of group identifications and healthy behaviour. Design This study is based on the Scottish portion of the data obtained for Wave 1 of the two‐wave cross‐national Health in Groups project. Totally 1,824 patients from five Scottish general practitioner (GP) surgeries completed the Wave 1 questionnaire in their homes. Methods Participants completed measures of group identification, group contact, health behaviours, and demographic variables. Results Results demonstrate that the greater the number of social groups with which one identifies, the healthier one's behaviour on any of the four health dimensions considered. Conclusions We believe our results are due to the fact that group identification will generally (1) enhance one's sense of meaning in life, thereby leading one to take more care of oneself, (2) increase one's sense of responsibility towards other in‐group members, thereby enhancing one's motivation to be healthy in order to fulfil those responsibilities, and (3) increase compliance with healthy group behavioural norms. Taken together, these processes amply overcompensate for the fact that some groups with which people may identify can actually prescribe unhealthy behaviours. What is already known on this subject? Researchers from a number of disciplines – especially social epidemiologists – have investigated the link between social ties and health behaviour in the past. These researchers have shown that, overall, greater ties predict healthier behaviour. However, the vast majority of studies have operationalized ‘social ties’ as the amount of contact (e.g., frequency of interactions) with close others or members of relevant groups, while generally neglecting the subjective dimension of ties with others and groups (e.g., sense of belonging and affiliation). More recently, some researchers have begun to look at the link between group identification and health behaviour. However, to date, this new research approach has focussed on the linear association between identification with one specific group and health behaviours. What does this study add? This is the first quantitative study looking at the impact of one's number of high group identifications on four crucial health behaviours (smoking, drinking, exercise, and diet) in a large community sample. This is the first study that looks at how number of group identifications and number of contact‐intensity groups compare, in terms of their effects on health behaviours.

Communities are vital sources of support during crisis, providing collective contexts for shared identity and solidarity that predict supportive, prosocial responses. The COVID-19 pandemic has presented a global health crisis capable of exerting a heavy toll on the mental health of community members while inducing unwelcome levels of social disconnection. Simultaneously, lockdown restrictions have forced vulnerable community members to depend upon the support of fellow residents.Fortunately, voluntary helping can be beneficial to the wellbeing of the helper as well as the recipient, offering beneficial collective solutions. Using insights from social identity approaches to volunteering and disaster responses, this study explored whether the opportunity to engage in helping fellow community members may be both unifying and beneficial for those engaging in coordinated community helping. Survey data collected in the UK during June 2020 showed that coordinated community helping predicted the psychological bonding of community members by building a sense of community identification and unity during the pandemic, which predicted

Resilient, cohesive communities are important contributors to the health and well-being of their residents (Ehsan, Klaas, Bastianen, & Spini, 2019). Advances in social psychology suggest a multitude of physical and mental health outcomes derive from meaningful belonging in social groups within a range of contexts (Haslam,