Interprofessional education (IPE) involves students from different professions being brought together to learn about each other's profession. Several models of IPE exist, and central to the debate around which of these models is the most appropriate is the question of the stage of training in which to implement these programmes. Currently, however, there is no consensus on this question. Debate so far has revolved around the strength of professional identities, or lack thereof, amongst pre‐qualifying students and how this may influence interprofessional learning. The potential role of professional identity in IPE seems to be unresolved. The present article adds to this debate by investigating the level of professional identity when students commence their professional studies; the differences in the level of professional identity between students from a range of professions; and the factors which may affect the initial levels of professional identification. Data were collected by questionnaire from the first‐year cohort of Health and Social Care (H&SC) students embarking on IPE as an embedded part of an undergraduate pre‐qualifying programme. A sample of 1254 students was achieved. Professional identity was measured using an adaptation of a previously described scale. Our findings suggest that a degree of professional identity is evident before students begin their training. Differences in strength of initial professional identity were observed across professions, with physiotherapy students displaying the highest levels of professional identification. To test for associations between professional identity and a number of independent variables, an ordinary least squares (OLS) regression model was estimated. The variables that were found to be significant predictors of baseline professional identity were: gender; profession; previous work experience in H&SC environments; understanding of team working; knowledge of profession; and cognitive flexibility. Some explanations for these findings are presented and the implications are discussed.

No abstract

This article examines intergroup processes amongst neophyte health and social care students who are about to embark on an interprofessional education (IPE) programme. Positive relationships between students of the different professions must be optimized to promote student learning of each other, a central objective of these courses. It has been proposed that to reduce conflict and promote harmonious intergroup relations during this IPE activity, students from each professional group should feel their own group (the ingroup) to be distinctive from other professional groups (the outgroup) on some key characteristics (intergroup differentiation). Good relations are further promoted if the characteristics they see as distinctive to their identities are also recognized as distinctive by other professional groups (mutual intergroup differentiation). The current article considers the incidence of these two factors in neophyte health and social care students and identifies sources of potential intergroup conflict. The findings of the study suggest that all groups of neophyte health and social care students perceived their ingroup as distinct from other professional groups, with the exception of audiology students. The implications of this finding to the relationships between students participating in IPE are discussed. Furthermore, in certain groups there was evidence that students of these groups were seen by others as they saw themselves. This was particularly the case for doctors and social workers and implies that these professions will suffer least from a threat to their group distinctiveness. However, there were instances where characteristics, seen as distinctive by the professional group itself, were not recognized by other groups. For example, physiotherapy students believe that being a team player, and decision making and practical skills were all distinctive characteristics of their profession. However, these features were not recognized as distinctive by other professional groups. The implications of matches/mismatches in how students see themselves, and how they may be viewed by others, are discussed in terms of their impact on student learning experiences and relationships during IPE.