Knights, knaves, pawns and queens: Attitudes to behaviour in postwar Britain

Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health

Volumn 61, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 95-97

  Welshman, John ^a  

^a LANCASTER UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ALTRUISM; BEHAVIORAL RESPONSE; POST-WAR; PUBLIC ATTITUDE; PUBLIC SERVICE;

ARTICLE; FAMILY ATTITUDE; FAMILY PLANNING; HEALTH BEHAVIOR; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HUMAN; MILITARY MEDICINE; MOTIVATION; PUBLIC FIGURE; SOCIAL SECURITY; SOCIAL WELFARE; UNITED KINGDOM;

ATTITUDE; BEHAVIOR; CONSUMER PARTICIPATION; FEMALE; FRAUD; GREAT BRITAIN; HUMANS; MALE; PREJUDICE; PSYCHOSOCIAL DEPRIVATION; SOCIAL WORK;

EURASIA; EUROPE; UNITED KINGDOM; WESTERN EUROPE;

EID: 33846636979     PISSN: 0143005X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/jech.2006.046367     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Le Grand J. Knights, knaves or pawns? Human behaviour and social policy. J Soc Policy 1997;26:149-69.
2. Le Grand J. Motivation, agency, and public policy: of knights & knaves, pawns & queens. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003:2-11.
3. Welshman J. The unknown Titmuss. J Soc Policy 2004;33:225-47.
4. Deacon A. Review article: different interpretations of agency within welfare debates. Soc Policy Soc 2004;3:447-55.
5. Welshman J. Ideology, social science, and public policy: the debate over transmitted deprivation. Twentieth Century Br Hist 2005;16:306-41.
6. Joseph K. The cycle of family deprivation. In: Joseph K. Caring for people. London: Conservative Political Centre 1972, 29-46.
7. Rutter M, Madge N. Cycles of disadvantage: a review of research. London: Heinemann, 1976:327.
8. Castle B. The political challenge. In: British Association of Social Workers. The cycle of deprivation. Papers presented to a national study conference, Manchester University, March 1974. Birmingham: BASW, 1974:1-2.
9. Brown M, Madge N. Despite the welfare state: a report on the SSRC/DHSS Programme of Research into Transmitted Deprivation. London: Heinemann, 4-5.
10. Coffield F, Robinson P, Sarsby J. A cycle or deprivation? A case study of four families. London: Heinemann, 1980:163-4.
11. Coffield F. "Like father, like son": the family as a potential transmitter of deprivation. In: Madge N, eds. Families at risk. London: Heinemann, 1983:24.
12. Townsend P. The cycle of deprivation-the history of a confused thesis. In: British Association of Social Workers. The cycle of deprivation. Birmingham: BASW, 8-22.
13. Macnicol J. In pursuit of the underclass. J Soc Policy 1987;16:293-318.
14. Macnicol J. From 'problem family to 'underclass', 1945-95. In: Lowe R, Fawcett H, eds. Welfare policy in Britain:the road from 1945. London: Macmillan/Institute of Contemporary British History, 1999:69-93.
15. Joseph K. Social security: the new priorities. London: Conservative Political Centre, 1966, 7, 16.
16. Leadbeater C. New Labour's secret godfather. New Statesman 1999;128:13-14.
17. Social Science Research Council. Research on poverty: an SSRC review of current research. London: SSRC, 1968:10.
18. Halsey AH. Government against poverty in school and community. In: Wedderburn D, eds. Poverty, inequality and class structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1974:130.
19. Berthoud R. The disadvantages of inequality: a study of social deprivation. London: PEP, 1976:13.
20. Fuller R, Stevenson O. Policies, programmes and disadvantage: a review of the literature. London: Heinemann, 1983:2-4.
21. Crosland CAR. The future of socialism. London: Jonathan Cape, 1956.
22. Deacon A. Perspectives on welfare: ideas, ideologies and policy debates. Buckingham: Open University Press, 2002:23-6.
23. Rainwater L, Yancey WL. The Moynihan Report and the politics of controversy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1967.
24. Ministry of Housing and Local Government. Unsatisfactory tenants: Sixth report of the Housing Management Sub-Committee of the Central Housing Advisory Committee. London: HMSO, 1955:4.