Conceptualising foreign aid as a controversial social object, this study utilised Social Representations Theory as a social constructionist framework to understand the meanings that arise from people's social interactions in relation to foreign aid practice in a particular historical, political and social context such as the province of Sulu in Southern Philippines. Key informant interviews and group discussions with representatives of various social groups involved in the practice of foreign aid in Sulu were conducted. Research data were examined using thematic analysis. Results showed two interrelated representational systems about foreign aid in the province. First, foreign aid was understood as a valuable resource for peace and development in Sulu. Second, based on narratives of aid practice in the province, the same social object was also represented as a profiteering enterprise that operates at various levels of the aid structure. Results are discussed in terms of meaning-making in aid practice; the possible psychological, social and political consequences of the social meaning of foreign aid as a profiteering enterprise; and the potential of these social representations for reflection, critique and transformation in the practice of foreign aid.

There is little quantitative research regarding the causes and expression of prejudice and discrimination against Middle-Eastern Australians. We report two studies, one from the perspective of new settlers and a second from the perspective of host communities. The first found that Middle-Eastern Australians reported more discrimination compared with non-Middle-Eastern Australians. More discrimination was reported by Middle-Eastern males compared with females on dealings with the police, disrespect, name-calling, and distrust. The second study, focusing on attitudes of other Australians, found that they were more likely to perceive that Middle-Eastern Australians would be discriminated against compared with their own social group. When the non-Middle-Eastern Australians in the survey were asked for reasons why Australians from the Middle East were discriminated against, the most prevalent themes were (a) perceived conflict with ‘Australian values’, (b) fear of Muslims, (c) fear of terrorism, (d) negative media and (e) fear of difference. The overall finding that there are strong levels of public acknowledgment of the higher discriminatory burden endured by Middle-Eastern Australians is seen as a positive in terms of (1) community action to address that burden through (2) counteracting the socially negative attitudes that underpin discrimination in some Australian communities.

The three featured articles in the December 2010 section on cultural diversity across the Pacific address important cultural issues in psychology. Berry (2010) applied these issues to intercultural relations and acculturation, Furnham (2010) to culture shock, and Marsella and Yamada (2010) to psychopathology. The common theme among these articles was the Western-centric dominance of psychology's research, theories, models and practice, in part because of structural discrimination such as ethnocentric curricula, policies and teaching methods within academic institutions. In Aotearoa New Zealand, including mātauranga Māori (Māori knowledge) and kaupapa Māori (Māori philosophy) within curricula for clinical psychology has started to address that Western-centric dominance, but more importantly, resulted in more culturally safe and responsive psychological services being provided to Māori users of those services. The present commentary suggested that including and integrating more cross-cultural and indigenous knowledge into the tertiary curricula of applied psychology fields, such as clinical, industrial-organisational, and coaching psychology would be one way to counter the Western-centric dominance.