Rally 'round the flag effects (J. E. Mueller, 1970) represent sudden and dramatically powerful situation-specific shifts in attitudes toward the American president. However, the extant literature has yet to fully clarify the nature of the psychological dynamics associated with this effect. These ambiguities reflect fundamental differences of opinion among scholars on some very basic questions such as whether overtly experienced emotion should mediate these attitudinal shifts or whether these changes reflect more general shifts in conservative ideology. Across 4 experiments, the authors sought to gain greater clarity on these and other important matters using a multimethod approach in which the authors varied whether participants viewed documentary footage of the 9/11 attacks (Experiments 1-2), generated autobiographical memories of that event (Experiment 3), or retrieved nonpolitical memories from their past (Experiment 4). The authors discuss the relevance of the present findings for theory and research across a variety of different theoretical and methodological paradigms, including social psychological models of threat, emotional appraisal models, and the political science literature.

The present research examines how perceived inclusive and exclusive peer norms for cross‐ethnic relations contribute to predicting interest in cross‐ethnic friendship among ethnic minority and majority children. Across two survey studies, European American and African American children (Study 1) and European American and Latino American children (Study 2) reported on the extent to which they perceived inclusive and exclusive peer norms for cross‐ethnic relations, as well as their own interest in developing cross‐ethnic friendships. Results from both studies showed that perceiving inclusive norms for cross‐ethnic relations from in‐group peers uniquely predicted children's interest in cross‐group friendships, beyond what can be accounted for by perceiving exclusive norms from in‐group peers and preexisting cross‐group friendships. Similar effects were observed for ethnic minority and majority children, and even after controlling for children's prior cross‐group friendships. Implications of these findings for future research and efforts to promote inclusion among ethnic minority and majority children are discussed.

This research tests how perceived school and peer norms predict interethnic experiences among ethnic minority and majority youth. With studies in Chile (654 nonindigenous and 244 Mapuche students, M = 11.20 and 11.31 years) and the United States (468 non-Hispanic White and 126 Latino students, M = 11.66 and 11.68 years), cross-sectional results showed that peer norms predicted greater comfort in intergroup contact, interest in cross-ethnic friendships, and higher contact quality, whereas longitudinal results showed that school norms predicted greater interest in cross-ethnic friendships over time. Distinct effects of school and peer norms were also observed for ethnic minority and majority youth in relation to perceived discrimination, suggesting differences in how they experience cross-ethnic relations within school environments.

With surveys of Protestants and Catholics in Northern Ireland, and Whites and Blacks in South Africa, this research examines how both contact quality and exposure to intergroup conflict predict attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors relevant to intergroup reconciliation. Across both studies, contact of higher quality predicted more positive intergroup attitudes, trust, more positive perceptions of outgroup intentions in working toward peace, and greater engagement in reconciliation efforts. These effects were observed when controlling for exposure to conflict-related violence in one's neighborhood growing up, and the extent to which one has personally suffered due to the conflict. Implications of these findings for future work on intergroup contact and reconciliation efforts are discussed.

BackgroundChronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) affects > 3 million people in the UK. Acute exacerbations of COPD (AECOPD) are the second most common reason for emergency hospital admission in the UK. Pulmonary rehabilitation is usual care for stable COPD but there is little evidence for early pulmonary rehabilitation (EPR) following AECOPD, either in hospital or immediately post discharge.ObjectiveTo assess the feasibility of recruiting patients, collecting data and delivering EPR to patients with AECOPD to evaluate EPR compared with usual care.DesignParallel-group, pilot 2 × 2 factorial randomised trial with nested qualitative research and an economic analysis.SettingTwo acute hospital NHS trusts. Recruitment was carried out from September 2015 to April 2016 and follow-up was completed in July 2016.ParticipantsEligible patients were those aged ≥ 35 years who were admitted with AECOPD, who were non-acidotic and who maintained their blood oxygen saturation level (SpO2) within a prescribed range. Exclusions included the presence of comorbidities that affected the ability to undertake the interventions.Interventions(1) Hospital EPR: muscle training delivered at the patient’s hospital bed using a cycle ergometer and (2) home EPR: a pulmonary rehabilitation programme delivered in the patient’s home. Both interventions were delivered by trained physiotherapists. Participants were allocated on a 1 : 1 : 1 : 1 ratio to (1) hospital EPR (n = 14), (2) home EPR (n = 15), (3) hospital EPR and home EPR (n = 14) and (4) control (n = 15). Outcome assessors were blind to treatment allocation; it was not possible to blind patients.Main outcome measuresFeasibility of recruiting 76 participants in 7 months at two centres; intervention delivery; views on intervention/research acceptability; clinical outcomes including the 6-minute walk distance (6WMD); and costs. Semistructured interviews with participants (n = 27) and research health professionals (n = 11), optimisation assessments and an economic analysis were also undertaken.ResultsOver 7 months 449 patients were screened, of whom most were not eligible for the trial or felt too ill/declined entry. In total, 58 participants (76%) of the target 76 participants were recruited to the trial. The primary clinical outcome (6MWD) was difficult to collect (hospital EPR,n = 5; home EPR,n = 6; hospital EPR and home EPR,n = 5; control,n = 5). Hospital EPR was difficult to deliver over 5 days because of patient discharge/staff availability, with 34.1% of the scheduled sessions delivered compared with 78.3% of the home EPR sessions. Serious adverse events were experienced by 26 participants (45%), none of which was related to the interventions. Interviewed participants generally found both interventions to be acceptable. Home EPR had a higher rate of acceptability, mainly because patients felt too unwell when in hospital to undergo hospital EPR. Physiotherapists generally found the interventions to be acceptable and valued them but found delivery difficult because of staffing issues. The health economic analysis results suggest that there would be value in conducting a larger trial to assess the cost-effectiveness of the hospital EPR and hospital EPR plus home EPR trial arms and collect more information to inform the hospital cost and quality-adjusted life-year parameters, which were shown to be key drivers of the model.ConclusionsA full-scale randomised controlled trial using this protocol would not be feasible. Recruitment and delivery of the hospital EPR intervention was difficult. The data obtained can be used to design a full-scale trial of home EPR. Because of the small sample and large confidence intervals, this study should not be used to inform clinical practice.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN18634494.FundingThis project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full inHealth Technology Assessment; Vol. 22, No. 11. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.