Empathy rules, maps and paths: A qualitative exploration of the factors that facilitate or inhibit empathy and prosocial responding among youth.

The aim of this study is to explore young people's perspectives on the factors that facilitate or inhibit empathy and prosocial responding among youth. Qualitative focus groups (n = 29) were undertaken with Irish young people aged 13-17 years relating to their views on the factors that facilitate or inhibit the expression of empathy. Parents, friends, and social media were found to be key influences, whereas barriers identified included societal norms, gender norms, lack of skill, or knowledge and target characteristics. This research provides important insights into adolescents' perceptions of the social correlates of empathy. Concepts from the sociology of empathy, such as empathy maps and paths, are helpful in drawing out the implications for future research and practice.

Examining the relationship between adversity and suicidality and self-harm in Irish adolescents from 2020 to 2022.

BACKGROUND: Research indicates that there is a strong association between childhood adversity and youth suicide and self-harm. However, there is currently a lack of understanding about the patterns of adversity most frequently experienced by youth across social settings, and whether these typologies differently predict youth engagement in suicide and self-harm. This study examines the dominant patterns of adversity experienced by adolescents across home, peer, and school contexts, and explores the relationship between youth's adversity profiles and their suicide and self-harm outcomes, across a two year period (2020-2022). METHODS: Secondary analyses were performed on data collected from 10,281 (50 % male) adolescents who participated in the Irish Planet Youth questionnaire in 2020 (n = 5004) or 2022 (n = 5277). RESULTS: Findings from clustered latent class analyses indicated that there are four dominant profiles of adversity experienced by adolescents. Class 1 (Multiple Adversity) was characterised by a high probability of experiencing adversity across multiple social settings. Class 2 (Parent Adversity) had a strong likelihood of experiencing adversity with parents. Class 3 (Peer Adversity) were likely to experience adversity within the peer/friend domain. Class 4 was characterised by a low probability of experiencing adversity. Findings from logistic regression models with BCH training weights indicated that there were significant differences in self-harm and suicidality across the adversity classes. In comparison to the low adversity group, adolescents in the multiple adversity group were more likely to self-harm and attempt suicide. LIMITATIONS: These findings are based on cross-sectional data and rely on the use of single-item measurements, which may limit the generalisability of findings. DISCUSSION: Results indicate that youth who experience adversity across home, peer and school contexts are at the greatest risk of engaging in suicide and self-harm. These findings have important implications for policy and practice, and suggest that youth experiencing adversity across multiple settings should be priority targets for intervention.

Youth Suicide and Self-Harm: Latent Class Profiles of Adversity and the Moderating Roles of Perceived Support and Sense of Safety.

Research suggests that exposure to adversity can lead to an increased risk of experiencing suicidal and self-injurious thoughts or behaviours, but few studies have examined whether different patterns of adversity are differentially associated with youth suicide/self-harm. The current study aims to explore the relationship between exposure to adversity across various social domains and youth self-harm and suicidality, using a person centred approach, and examines whether access to social support and a sense of safety across home, peer or school settings buffer the relationship between adversity and self-harm/suicidality. Secondary data analyses were carried out on cross-sectional self-report data collected from 4848 (Mage=15.78, SD = 0.59; 50% female) adolescents who participated in the Irish Planet Youth survey. Latent Class Analyses identified four distinct profiles of adversity; low-adversity (n = 2043, 42%); peer-adversity (n = 972, 20%); parental-adversity (n = 1189, 25%); and multiple-adversity (n = 644, 13%). Findings from logistic moderated regressions indicated that there were significant differences in self-harm and suicidality across the adversity classes. Although parental support and perceived safety at school were negatively associated with suicidality and self-harm outcomes, no significant moderation effects were observed. These findings suggest that youth who experience adversity across multiple social domains are more likely to report suicidal and self-harm thoughts and behaviours, and should be key targets for intervention/prevention efforts. While parental support and school safety may act as significant compensatory factors, further work is needed to identify the social resources that can offset the risk imposed by youth's adverse experiences.

New actors and new learning spaces for new times: a framework for schooling that extends beyond the school.

Taking the 'breakdown' in regular schooling as a result of the Covid pandemic as a catalyst to reimagine education, this article formulates a theoretical framework, using design research, that enables a fundamental reconceptualization and introduction of new actors into the space of schooling, which is a learning environment that traditionally has maintained rigid boundaries. Recommendations are proposed for bridging formal and nonformal education for practitioners and policymakers, bringing together teachers and youth workers to co-construct a learning environment. In creating a prototype for learning that involves a more joined-up and connected paradigm in education, as well as bridging the gap between learning in formal and non-formal contexts, we create a shift towards reimagining and recognising the importance of a holistic view of education by re-evaluating and supporting a broader range of actors who can participate in the education of children and young people.

Bridging the gap: Using Veerman and Van Yperen's (2007) framework to conceptualise and develop evidence informed practice in an Irish youth work organisation.

While there is considerable support among the policy, practice and academic communities for the idea that practice in youth work should be based on evidence, Veerman and Van Yperen (2007) highlight the fact that little practice in the area of youth care is actually evidence based due to the paucity of experimental studies in the field and the difficulties associated with evaluation of non-standardised interventions such as youth work. They propose a model consisting of levels of evidence, the aim of which is to 'bridge the gap between evidence based and evidence informed practice' (p. 218). In order to address the dearth of examples in the international literature of how organisations have dealt with these complexities in practice, this article provides a case study of how a large Irish youth organisation, Foróige, has endeavoured to adopt an inclusive approach to evidence, working towards both evidence based and evidence informed practice. Drawing on Veerman and Van Yperen's (2007) framework, the case study shows that Foróige committed itself to gathering different types of evidence, including logic models and theoretical understandings at the foundation level and experimental design studies of key programmes at the advanced level. The case study focuses in detail on the intermediate level, whereby practitioners were trained to evaluate aspects of their own work, with a view to embedding evaluation and reflection in day to day practice. The process is described and key lessons emerging are discussed.