Category: MIL-OSI

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Jolanta Burke, Associate Professor, Centre for Positive Health Sciences, RCSI University of Medicine and Health Sciences

Positive psychology forms the backbone of wellbeing programmes around the world. Many people aiming to improve their mental health and live a good life are told to follow a programme of activities that focus on making an intentional effort to improve their wellbeing.

But recent research I conducted with colleagues shows that while wellbeing experts often recommend these activities to others, in real life they rarely practice them themselves. This discrepancy may tell us something important about what truly sustains wellbeing over time.

I interviewed 22 experts and practitioners in positive psychology – some with more than a decade of experience. All of them regularly recommended wellbeing activities to clients, friends and family members and told me they would tailor each activity according to an individual’s needs.

But when I asked them about their own application of positive psychology practices, it became apparent that they didn’t engage in these activities regularly. They only tended to use them during difficult periods, when they felt a need for a wellbeing boost.

Positive psychology programmes often recommend patients activities like “gratitude journaling” (writing down the things one is grateful for) daily, or undertaking three acts of kindness each week. The key emphasis with these programmes is to make an intentional, concerted effort to be more positive.

But our study showed that experts don’t use wellbeing the way many positive psychology programmes teach it. Instead of following a schedule of activities, their wellbeing came from having a flexible, wellbeing-oriented mindset, which we termed a “meliotropic wellbeing mindset”.

The term is derived from the Latin “melior” (better) and Greek “tropism” (movement towards). It’s about moving toward what makes life worth living. This way of thinking meant that experts didn’t treat wellbeing as a set of tasks they needed to complete – but rather merely as part of everyday life.

It also meant that none of the experts actively “chased” happiness or positivity. When they had a bad day, they just let it be – accepting that life sometimes comes with difficulty.

Our participants did not make the kind of drastic, intentional changes in their lives that they’d recommend patients make to improve wellbeing. They already regularly did things in their day to day that made their lives feel more meaningful – for example making time to read a book daily, volunteering for a local charity, cooking a favourite meal or even practising yoga.

While these kinds of activities may be recommended as part of a positive psychology programme, the difference here is that the experts did these activities because they were part of their identity or because it helped them feel balanced, instead of only doing them because they’d been advised to.

They were also in tune with their bodies, caring for them as attentively as they cared for their minds by prioritising sleep, nourishing food and regular movement.

And because they were highly attuned to how their physical and social environment affected them, they weren’t afraid to take proactive steps to protect their wellbeing. For instance, if their work made them unhappy, or if someone in their social circle was consistently draining, they didn’t hesitate to seek alternatives or to limit contact.

In addition, they were open to opportunities that allowed them to embrace life. One participant described waiting outside the school to pick up her child. The weather was so beautiful that she slipped off her shoes and walked barefoot across a patch of grass – a simple act that boosted her mood.

Read more:
Finding joy in the little things really can benefit your wellbeing – a scientist explains

Another one had a really bad day but when she finally got into bed that night, she was struck by a feeling of gratitude for the warmth and safety of her home, compared to all the people who have been displaced by war.

Their understanding of positive psychology helped them notice these regular opportunities to boost wellbeing.

Mindset change

Every year, new wellbeing apps appear, schools incorporate wellbeing into their curricula and organisations invest heavily in workplace wellbeing programmes. Yet the impact of these initiatives remains modest. And, some reports suggest that wellbeing programmes may even have a negative effect.

Our study’s findings may help explain why the impact of these programmes is so varied – and shows these positive activities may not be as effective for people who have applied wellbeing practices extensively in their lives.

The study also highlights an urgent need for positive psychology researchers and experts to rethink their priorities. Rather than creating ever-longer wellbeing programmes or promoting the pursuit of happiness, which evidence shows is not necessarily beneficial, we should focus on understanding the longer-term impact of wellbeing practices.

For anyone trying to improve their wellbeing, our findings are an important reminder that you don’t have to constantly “work on yourself” or pursue happiness. Experts in wellbeing rarely rely on dramatic life changes or wellbeing programmes.

Instead, they quietly cultivate a mindset that helps orient themselves toward what really matters. It’s not about chasing happiness or forcing ourselves to think positively on a bad day. It’s about gently moving toward the things that make life feel more worthwhile, in ways that fit who you are. That shift in mindset is something that all of us can adopt.

Jolanta Burke does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Positive psychology experts don’t follow their own advice. What they actually do may be the key to wellbeing – https://theconversation.com/positive-psychology-experts-dont-follow-their-own-advice-what-they-actually-do-may-be-the-key-to-wellbeing-266737

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Naomi Joseph, Arts + Culture Editor, The Conversation

For the arts team at The Conversation, 2025 will largely be remembered as the year of Jane Austen. Since January, we have been tirelessly working towards December 16, which marked 250 years since her birth. To celebrate, we explored the world of Austen in a series of articles plus a six-part podcast – to determine the best of her work and get to know the elusive writer behind them.

The scholarship on Austen is incredibly diverse. We have published fascinating pieces from experts all over the country – some exploring specific themes in her books such as walking as an act of female resistance, and respite as an ingredient for romance. Others delved into the history of her time and how it’s represented in her work – exploring, for example, Regency balls and contemporary diversity.

We have chosen ten of our favourite articles and collated them into a free ebook, which you can download here.

This article is part of a series commemorating the 250th anniversary of Jane Austen’s birth. Despite having published only six books, she is one of the best-known authors in history. These articles explore the legacy and life of this incredible writer.

Fans of Jane Austen have very strong feelings regarding her work, and we also wanted to find out what our readers love most about her literary worlds. In that spirit, arts and culture editor Anna Walker launched the Jane Austen Fight Club: a series of articles where academics made the case for their favourite novel, heroine and leading man. Each includes the opportunity for you to have your say.

Let us know which of her books you think is best by answering the poll below.

The cherry on the top of the Austen sundae is our podcast, Jane Austen’s Paper Trail. Over six episodes – one for each of her major novels – we take you on a journey through the writer’s life and times with the help of some of the UK’s top Austen experts.

Along the way, we enjoy some buns in a scandal-filled tearoom in Bath to ask whether Austen was a gossip; we attend a glittering Regency ball to find out whether she was a romantic; and we call on her house in Hampshire to find out what she thought about being a writer. We also dive into the pages of each book to see what more we can glean with the help of our Austen specialists.

There will be a final bonus episode in January 2026, in which we will answer listeners’ questions with a panel of experts. So please tell us what you’d most like to know about Austen and her work, either by emailing podcast@theconversation.com or in the comments below.

I have to confess something. Before this year, if you had asked me if I liked Jane Austen, I would have said no. I enjoyed the humour in the few books I had read and appreciated the skill of her writing, but found the formulaic narrative arcs frustrating. They ended too neatly, in my opinion.

Having got to know her intimately this year, you’ll be glad to hear my opinion has changed. I now have a deep and sincere reverence for her books – particularly Northanger Abbey, which is such a funny and incisive takedown of snobby readers. While I am ready to move on to 2026, I must admit I feel a little sad to be leaving Miss Austen behind.

Looking for something good? Cut through the noise with a carefully curated selection of the latest releases, live events and exhibitions, straight to your inbox every fortnight, on Fridays. Sign up here.

– ref. Our Jane Austen year – a free ebook, loads of expert insights and a six-part podcast – https://theconversation.com/our-jane-austen-year-a-free-ebook-loads-of-expert-insights-and-a-six-part-podcast-272464

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Sophie King-Hill, Associate Professor at the Health Services Management Centre, University of Birmingham

As the UK government launches its violence against women and girls strategy, the situation it is seeking to remedy makes for hard reading.

One in eight women in England and Wales experienced sexual assault, domestic abuse or stalking between March 2024 and March 2025. Between June 2024 and June 2025, almost 200 rapes were recorded daily. More than 150 women are killed each year.

The picture is similar for young people too: 39% of teens aged 13 to 17 experience emotional or physical abuse in a relationship.

The strategy emphasises prevention and early intervention – stopping violence before it occurs, or before it worsens. It centres support for victims and accountability perpetrators.

The strategy is built off the back of a number of interventions that have already taken place. These include making sexually explicit deepfakes a criminal offense, laws on cyberflashing and the introduction of interventions of “honour” abuse.

The goal is to halve violence against women and girls in a decade. It’s an ambitious target that requires action in multiple different areas. Below are four key points from the strategy and consideration as to why they’ve been included.

1. A major societal shift for men and boys

Significantly, the strategy envisages a whole-society approach to this problem. That means that it recognises male violence as a public health crisis rooted in patriarchal norms and hegemonic masculinity.

Addressing this requires early socialisation of boys, safe spaces for them to explore difficult issues and identity development and emotional literacy, which will shift the focus from blame to prevention and cultural change.

Attached to the strategy is an explanatory note that discusses men and boys as victims of violence and explores how this violence not only causes harm but also influences future behaviours and experiences.

One thing that isn’t explicitly mentioned is the importance of safeguarding language when abuses and violence is experienced by boys. Ensuring terminology is inclusive, legally accurate and reflects all children and young people, not just girls, is important in this context.

An important part of the strategy is the idea that reducing violence against women and girls requires a fundamental shift in how society engages men and boys. It argues that focusing solely on survivors and those who cause harm is insufficient because the roots of this issue lie in deeply embedded gender norms that sustain patterns of inequality.

To dismantle these norms, men and boys must be seen not as potential risk factors but as key stakeholders in change. The note calls for education that equips boys and men to challenge inequitable attitudes and behaviours, fostering empathy, respect and healthy relationships.

2. Starting early to prevent problem behaviour

As part of a goal to disrupt harmful behaviour before it begins, schools will get help to deliver education on misogyny and consent education. There are also plans to work with parents and carers which include a 2026 public campaign to help them reinforce respectful relationships at home.

An online parent hub will offer guidance on media literacy and online safety and a new digital service under the best start in life strategy to provide trusted advice and connect families to local support. There will also be campaigns and awareness raising activities to generate a national public conversation around violence against women and girls.

Running parallel to this is a focus on supporting young men and boys in understanding these issues and giving them support when concerns are raised. This aspect of the strategy links strongly with the new guidance given to schools on relationships, sex and health that is due to become statutory in 2026.

3. A ‘relentless pursuit of perpetrators’

A key term in the strategy is the “relentless pursuit of perpetrators”. To ensure that justice for victims is swift and robust, domestic abuse specialists will be embedded into emergency services response teams and specialist rape and sexual offence teams will be introduced.

These changes reflect recommendations made by the independent inquiry into child sexual abuse for stronger accountability and specialist expertise in responding to sexual abuse.

4. Support for survivors

For victims and survivors, there will be a push to address what is seen as an inconsistent approach. The intention is to meet their needs, not only via specialist services but also within the criminal justice system.

This means creating a more trauma-informed approach in courts and policing, improving communication and procedural fairness and embedding specialist training for justice professionals. Victims should experience consistent, respectful treatment wherever they seek help, whether through dedicated support services or during legal processes, so that justice feels accessible, safe and supportive.

The strategy recognises that helping people move on with their lives after experiencing violence requires a joined-up approach, not just to the criminal justice element but to housing and healthcare. This again reflects recommendations made by the independent inquiry into child sexual abuse, which stressed that support needs to be ongoing (beyond the immediate situation) and tailored to individual needs, as requirements often change over time.

This strategy marks a significant step forward. Its whole-society, public health approach and focus on prevention, survivor support, cultural change and accountability are essential elements that are needed to reduce violence in all its forms.

Its success will depend on sustained investment, cross-sector collaboration and a commitment to embedding these principles and actions into everyday life. By addressing root causes, supporting survivors and engaging men and boys as partners in change, we can move closer to a future built on respect, equity and safety for all.

Sophie King-Hill received funding from the ESRC.

– ref. Violence against women and girls: four key takeaways from a strategy that aims to change society – https://theconversation.com/violence-against-women-and-girls-four-key-takeaways-from-a-strategy-that-aims-to-change-society-272096

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Justin Colson, Senior Lecturer in Urban and Digital History, School of Advanced Study, University of London

We often imagine medieval life as dull, dirty and short, with little in the way of material comfort or decoration. However, medieval Londoners were importing toys, treats and trinkets by the boatload centuries before the modern festive rush.

Searching in the records of imports contained within London’s extensive late medieval customs accounts, we found that medieval Londoners, much like their modern-day counterparts, were hooked on mass-produced, cheaply imported items.

Everyday goods from tennis balls to children’s dolls and board games were imported by the thousands, with prices that show they were not elite luxuries. This reveals that medieval people had plenty of “stuff” and suggest an attitude to consumerism that’s not so very different from our own.

Our new project has digitised records of more than 200,000 consignments of imports and exports which passed through the Port of London between 1380 and 1560.

Historians have looked at these sources for generations, particularly to analyse exports of English wool and cloth. Until now though, little attention has been paid to the imported goods themselves. These records give a real insight to the variety and rich material culture of everyday life. We have counted thousands of different commodities, from printed alphabets to zinziber (ginger).

By analysing the goods on which Londoners paid customs duty each November and December we have uncovered a detailed picture of the objects imported in time for Christmas celebrations.

Some of the richest Londoners, such as the Cely family whose letters from the 1470s survive, travelled to Bergen-op-Zoom, near Antwerp, in modern Belgium, to buy from the “Cold Mart”. One of Europe’s biggest trade fairs, this market, which began on November 6 each year, could be seen as a forerunner of a modern Christmas Market.

For most people, however, homewares, trinkets and gifts were imported by an army of merchants, many of them Dutch and Flemish. These traders then sold them on in London’s haberdashers’ shops – many of them on London Bridge – and via travelling chapmen (pedlars) who sold door-to-door in the countryside.

Seasonal highlights included children’s rattles and dolls, tennis balls, gaming boards, dice, devotional items such as rosary beads and Agnus Dei jewellery. Large quantities of fruit and spices appear throughout the records alongside jewellery and fine leather gloves, which were particularly common gifts.

In November 1480, one single consignment included dozens of paintings, whistles, harp strings, hundreds of candlesticks, a “box of japes” (tricks or toys)’, and “14 dozen Jesuses”.

We’ve found amazing amounts of evidence for Londoners’ reading, and writing habits, with printed books imported by the basket, chest, or even by the barrel from the 1480s onward. The aptly named Wynkyn de Worde, England’s second recorded printer, paid custom duties on “one hoggeshede bookes” (yes, the same as a hogshead beer barrel) worth 50 shillings in 1507.

Frustratingly, though we hardly ever get the title or description of individual books. Paper, both for writing, and as wrapping paper, was an equally regular import. While spectacles, often with matching cases, were routinely imported by the hundred.

Less common, but fascinating consignments illustrate London’s emerging global connections. These include coconut shells, often set with silver to turn them into cups, and “popingays” (pet parrots), one of which was assessed for customs duties in 1421 along with a sack of seeds supplied as its food.

It’s striking that so many of these objects were clearly ubiquitous but have otherwise left so little trace. That’s precisely because they were meant to be cheap and disposable. Customs accounts provide rare evidence of the everyday possessions, and shopping habits, of ordinary medieval people, revealing how many goods were lost to time.

While London Museum holds some of the finest surviving examples of medieval household objects, the customs accounts show how many more once existed.

By looking at these records as sources for cultural history, we can begin to trace the movement of tastes and consumer preferences across borders. Our approach reveals that customs accounts don’t only document trade, but illuminate life.

Looking for something good? Cut through the noise with a carefully curated selection of the latest releases, live events and exhibitions, straight to your inbox every fortnight, on Fridays. Sign up here.

Justin Colson receives funding for this project from the Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC) and German Research Foundation (DFG).

Werner Scheltjens receives funding for this project from the Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC) and German Research Foundation (DFG).

– ref. Medieval Londoners’ cheaply imported mass-produced Christmas gifts look surprisingly familiar – https://theconversation.com/medieval-londoners-cheaply-imported-mass-produced-christmas-gifts-look-surprisingly-familiar-272218

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Richard Whitman, Member of the Conflict Analysis Research Centre, University of Kent; Royal United Services Institute

By agreeing to provide a loan of €90 billion (£79 billion) for the years 2026-2027, EU leaders have set the direction for the future of support for Ukraine.

At stake at the meeting of the European Council on December 18 was not just Kyiv’s ability to continue to defend itself against Russia’s ongoing aggression, but also the credibility of the EU as a player in the future of European security.

The key decision for the EU’s leaders was whether, and how, they would provide financial support for Ukraine over the next two years. Europeans have provided a vital drip-feed of ongoing financial assistance to Kyiv throughout almost four years of war.

But they have also struggled to fill, in its entirety, the hole created by the withdrawal of US support since the return of Donald Trump to the White House in January 2025.

The estimated €136 billion of budget support needed by Ukraine in 2026 and 2027 is a relatively fixed figure regardless of whether any peace initiative comes to fruition. A large part of it – €52 billion in 2026 and €33 billion in 2027 – is for military support.

The EU-agreed loan of €90 billion, “based on EU borrowing on the capital markets backed by the EU budget headroom”, thus covers at least the essential military needs of Ukraine. It The loan? will either contribute to the ongoing war effort or help create a sufficiently large and credible defence force to deter any future aggression by Russia.

Brussels is now the most important financial partner for Ukraine by any measure.

To fund the support the EU wants to provide to Ukraine, the commission developed two proposals. The most widely supported – and ultimately rejected – proposal was to use the Russian assets held by the Belgium-based Euroclear exchange as collateral to for a loan to fund Ukraine’s defence and reconstruction over the next few years.

In view of Belgian opposition because of insufficient protections against likely Russian retaliation, the European Commission had also proposed joint EU borrowing to fund support for Kyiv. Despite resistance from a group of EU member states, it was the only agreeable solution at the end.

The agreement on a loan to Ukraine funded from EU borrowing achieves the primary goal of securing at least a modicum of budgetary stability for Kyiv. But it came at the price of EU unity.

An “opt-out clause” had to be provided for Hungary, Slovakia and Czechia. All three countries are governed by deeply Euro-sceptical and Russia-leaning parties.

The deep irony is that by opposing EU support for Ukraine, they expose Ukrainians to a fate similar to that they suffered when the Soviet Union suppressed pro-democracy uprisings in Hungary in 1956 and then Czechoslovakia in 1968.

The EU until now managed to maintain a relatively united front on sanctions against Russia, on political, economic and military support for Ukraine, and on strengthening its own defence posture and defence-industrial base.

Over the past year, these efforts have accelerated in response to Trump’s return to the White House. This has shifted the US position to one which is in equal measure more America first and more pro-Russia than under any previous US administration.

And the pressure on Kyiv and Brussels has increased significantly over the past few weeks.

First there was the 28-point peace plan, which may have been a US-led proposal, but read as if it was Kremlin-approved. Then the new US national security strategy, which gave significantly more space to criticisms of Europe than to condemnation of Russia for the war in Ukraine.

No longer casting Russia as a threat to international security shows how detached the US has become from reality and the transatlantic alliance.

Russia’s president, Vladimir Putin, keeps insisting that he will achieve his war aims of fully annexing another four Ukrainian regions – in addition to Crimea – by force or diplomacy. Giving his usually optimistic outlook on Russia’s military and economic strength, Putin reiterated these points at his annual press conference on December 19.

EU divisions widen

In light of how squeezed Brussels and Kyiv now are between Washington and Moscow, the agreement on EU financing for Ukraine, despite its flaws and the acrimony it has caused within the EU, is a significant milestone in terms of the EU gaining more control over its future security. But it is not a magic wand resolving Europe’s broader problems of finding its place and defining its role in a new international order.

The agreement reached at the summit between the EU’s leaders on how to financially support Ukraine was overshadowed by their failure to overcome disagreement on signing a trade agreement with the South American trade group, Mercosur.

A decision on this trade deal with Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay and (currently suspended) Venezuela had been 25 years in the making. The deal was due to be signed on December 20, but this has now been postponed until January.

This is meant to provide time for additional negotiations to assuage opponents of the deal in its current form, especially France, Italy and Poland, who fear that cheaper imports from Mercosur countries will hurt European farmers. Those farmers staged a fiery protest at the European parliament ahead of the European Council meeting.

The delay does not derail the trade deal, which aims to create one of the world’s largest free trade areas. But it severely dents the EU’s claim to leadership of an international multilateral trading system based on rules that prioritise mutual benefit, as an alternative to the Trump administration’s unpredictable and punitive America-first trade practices.

Both disagreements continue to hamper the EU’s capacity for a decisive international role more generally. Where Trump’s US offers unpredictability, Brussels for now only offers extended procrastination on key decisions.

This places limits on the confidence that the EU’s would-be partners in a new international order can have in its ability to lead the shrinking number of liberal democracies. Without skilled and determined leadership, they will struggle to survive – let alone thrive – in a world carved up between Washington, Moscow and Beijing.

Richard Whitman has received funding from the Economic and Research Council of the UK as a Senior Fellow of the UK in a Changing Europe initiative. He is a past recipient of grant funding from the British Academy of the UK, EU Erasmus+ and Jean Monnet Programme. He is a Senior Associate Fellow at the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI), and an Academic Fellow of the European Policy Centre in Brussels. He is a past Associate Fellow and Head of the Europe Programme of the Royal Institute of International Affairs (Chatham House).

Stefan Wolff is a past recipient of grant funding from the Natural Environment Research Council of the UK, the United States Institute of Peace, the Economic and Social Research Council of the UK, the British Academy, the NATO Science for Peace Programme, the EU Framework Programmes 6 and 7 and Horizon 2020, as well as the EU’s Jean Monnet Programme. He is a Trustee and Honorary Treasurer of the Political Studies Association of the UK and a Senior Research Fellow at the Foreign Policy Centre in London.

– ref. EU agrees €90 billion loan to Ukraine, but squabbles over frozen Russian assets expose the bloc’s deep divisions – https://theconversation.com/eu-agrees-90-billion-loan-to-ukraine-but-squabbles-over-frozen-russian-assets-expose-the-blocs-deep-divisions-272095