Apply it. Test it. Question it. Develop it.
The Six Stages Framework (SSF) is a developing intersectional psychological framework for understanding movement in human attitudes, behaviour, relationships and systems.
Originally developed by Dr Shungu Hilda M’gadzah to deepen understanding of racism and anti-racism, the framework is also being explored in relation to wider questions of identity, belonging, inclusion, prejudice, psychological safety, leadership, systems, polarisation and human behaviour.
As use of the SSF grows, so too does the need for independent research.
A framework should not simply be used because it appears useful or intuitively makes sense. It should be capable of being applied, tested, questioned, challenged and refined.
Research can help us understand where the SSF adds explanatory value, where its limitations lie, whether its concepts can be operationalised and measured, how it functions across different populations and contexts, and how the framework itself may need to evolve.
We welcome interest from doctoral researchers, academics, universities, Educational Psychologists, EPs in training, practitioner researchers and others who would like to investigate the Six Stages Framework.
Why Research the Six Stages Framework?
The SSF proposes that people, groups, organisations and systems can move in different directions in response to difference, challenge, experience and perceived threat.
Its continuum extends across negative and positive directions, from positions characterised by unawareness, avoidance, hostility, blame and increasingly entrenched thinking through to greater awareness, reflection, systems thinking, advocacy and transformational leadership.
But describing a framework is not the same as demonstrating its validity or usefulness.
Research allows us to ask more demanding questions.
Can movement along the continuum be reliably identified? What psychological processes contribute to movement in either direction? Are particular transitions more difficult than others? What roles do identity threat, defensiveness, empathy, curiosity, social context or psychological safety play? Can SSF-informed interventions support measurable change? Does the framework operate similarly across different forms of prejudice, identities and cultural contexts? What changes when we move from understanding individual attitudes to analysing groups, organisations or wider systems?
These are empirical questions.
The purpose of developing an SSF research community is therefore not to generate studies designed to prove that the framework is correct.
It is to build a body of inquiry capable of asking:
Where does the SSF help? Where does it not? What can it explain? What might it overlook? And what do we still need to understand?
The developing record of publications, citations and applications identified so far can be explored here:
Research, Publications & Academic Impact
Possible Areas for SSF Research
The SSF may generate research questions relating to racism and anti-racist practice; prejudice, discrimination and bias; belonging versus fitting in; identity and intersectionality; psychological safety; educational inclusion and SEND; experiences of Black and minoritised children; adultification and interpretation of behaviour; leadership and organisational culture; professional decision-making; institutional and systemic change; allyship and advocacy; defensiveness and identity threat; empathy and perspective-taking; polarisation and ideological entrenchment; hate and pathways towards extremism; responses to uncertainty and ambiguity; disability and ableism; homophobia and attitudes towards sexual difference; social capital and authentic belonging; organisational readiness for change; human encounters and relational impact; movement between SSF stages; and applications across cultures, countries and professional contexts.
Researchers are equally encouraged to identify questions that challenge assumptions within the framework.
Understanding the SSF Continuum
Research might ask how reliably different positions on the Six Stages Framework continuum can be identified.
Can movement between stages be observed over time?
Are there identifiable psychological, relational or contextual factors associated with movement towards either the positive or negative axis?
Are some transitions more psychologically significant than others?
Is movement sequential, or might people occupy different positions according to context, identity, perceived threat or the issue under consideration?
Can people simultaneously occupy different positions in relation to different characteristics or domains?
These questions could help establish not merely whether the continuum is useful, but whether some assumptions underlying it require further refinement.
Belonging, Fitting In and Identity
Can the SSF help distinguish between presence, participation, inclusion and authentic belonging?
How do experiences of belonging relate to movement along the continuum?
What conditions enable people to experience belonging without being required to suppress, disguise or surrender important aspects of identity?
What is the psychological difference between being included by others and experiencing oneself as somebody who genuinely belongs?
How do social capital, representation, relationships and power affect those experiences?
These questions connect with wider SSF work examining belonging, identity, adaptation, masking and environments.
Racism and Anti-Racist Practice
How might the SSF support Educational Psychologists and other professionals in reflecting upon anti-racist practice?
Can SSF-informed reflection contribute to measurable changes in professional understanding, confidence or behaviour?
What psychological processes contribute to movement from awareness of racism towards sustained anti-racist action?
What prevents awareness from becoming action?
What happens when people move towards dismissal, hostility, blame or more deeply entrenched positions?
Could professional or organisational environments facilitate movement in either direction?
How might the Racism Prejudice Spectrum be evaluated as a tool for reflective discussion and tracking experiences of racial discrimination in schools? Can the contribution of a particular SSF tool be distinguished from the wider effects of a multi-component inclusion programme?
The SSF’s application to racism and higher education is discussed in Dempsey, M’gadzah and Watson (2022), Diversity and Racism in Higher Education: The Six Stages Framework. A 2026 journal article by Cunningham and Collison documents use of the Racism Prejudice Spectrum within a school-based Black student wellbeing programme; it does not provide a separate validation of the tool.
Psychological Safety
Psychological safety represents a particularly important research question, rather than an established empirical relationship within the SSF.
What is the relationship between psychological safety and an individual’s capacity to remain curious when identity, values or assumptions are challenged?
Does greater psychological safety make movement towards reflection, dialogue and systems thinking more likely?
Might psychologically unsafe environments increase defensive responding, silence, conformity, avoidance or entrenchment?
Could psychological safety function not simply as an organisational outcome but as a condition influencing movement along the continuum?
How might the SSF’s Eight Pillars of Psychological Safety be operationalised and evaluated?
These questions require empirical investigation.
They should not yet be presented as findings established by SSF research.
Organisations and Systems
Can the SSF be used reliably to understand organisational responses to equality, diversity and inclusion?
What happens when people within the same organisation occupy very different positions on the continuum?
Can an organisation publicly present itself as occupying one position while its everyday behaviours, decisions or systems suggest another?
How do individual beliefs interact with organisational culture, policy, leadership behaviour, professional norms and systems?
Can SSF-informed organisational interventions influence culture or behaviour over time?
Can meaningful differences between individual stage, organisational state and environmental conditions be identified and measured?
Bias and Professional Judgement
Can SSF concepts help researchers understand how stereotypes, reputational bias or inherited professional narratives influence decision-making?
How might movement along the continuum affect the way professionals interpret behaviour, risk, ability or need?
How does uncertainty affect professional judgement?
Who receives the benefit of doubt?
Whose behaviour tends to be interpreted generously — and whose is more readily understood through a deficit, threat or risk lens?
These questions have particular potential within Educational Psychology, SEND, education, health, social care and organisational decision-making.
Polarisation, Hate and Extremism
Can movement along the negative axis help researchers understand progression from unawareness and dismissal towards hostility, blame, entrenched views and extremist advocacy?
Are there identifiable psychological or social warning signs before more extreme positions emerge?
What roles do perceived threat, group identity, social reinforcement, grievance, certainty and belonging play?
What factors interrupt this direction of travel?
Where might psychological, educational, relational or systemic intervention have the greatest preventative effect?
SSF Concepts and Tools That Could Be Researched
Researchers do not need to investigate the entire Six Stages Framework.
A focused study of one psychological proposition or SSF concept may result in a stronger and more manageable research project.
Potential areas include the Six Stages continuum and movement along its positive and negative axes; the Racism Prejudice Spectrum and its potential use in reflective practice and incident tracking; the White Privilege Fence and differences in standpoint or proximity; Roads to Certainty and responses to ambiguity, attribution and evidence; the Bias Impact Tree and consequences of bias across systems; Mask of Me and identity, adaptation, conformity and belonging; the Racism Virus and processes of transmission, normalisation and social reinforcement; the Pathway to Violence; Family Equity Mapping; the Eight Pillars of Psychological Safety; and Human Encounters, including the relational question, How do people feel after they encounter us?
Some SSF concepts and tools remain in development. This creates opportunities not simply for application but for concept development, operationalisation, validation and critical evaluation.
Possible Research Methodologies
The Six Stages Framework does not prescribe a particular methodology.
Qualitative research might use interviews, focus groups, reflexive thematic analysis, Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis, narrative inquiry, case study, participatory action research or grounded theory.
Quantitative research might investigate measurement development, construct validity, reliability, associations between SSF-related constructs, differences between groups, pre/post intervention change or movement over time.
Mixed-method and longitudinal approaches may be particularly valuable where researchers wish to examine both measurable change and the psychological or contextual processes underlying it.
Participatory and co-produced methods may also be particularly important when research concerns communities whose experiences have historically been interpreted about them rather than with them.
The research question should determine the methodology — not the framework.
Critical Research Is Welcome
An important principle of the developing SSF research programme is that researchers must remain free to reach conclusions that do not support the framework.
Good research must be able not only to support a theory but also to question it.
Does the framework adequately represent the phenomenon being studied?
Are the stages sufficiently distinguishable?
Does a staged model imply more linearity than human behaviour actually demonstrates?
Might people occupy different positions simultaneously depending upon context?
Are there populations, identities, cultures or situations for which the framework works less well?
Are important psychological processes missing?
Could another theoretical framework explain the same findings more effectively?
Can SSF concepts actually be measured?
What evidence would lead to modification of the framework?
Critical examination is not a threat to the development of the SSF. It is part of its development.
Current and Emerging Research
A developing body of independent doctoral scholarship is now engaging with the SSF and with Dr M’gadzah’s wider work.
Helena Wood’s doctoral research at University College London discusses the Six Stages Framework as an assessment and intervention framework in the context of research concerning white privilege. Her empirical research was subsequently published in Educational and Child Psychology. (UCL Discovery)
Jenny Knight’s doctoral research at the University of Manchester explicitly describes Understanding and Dealing with Everyday Racism: The Six Stages Framework as a tool through which individuals and organisations can consider their position in relation to racial equity, inclusion and anti-racism and identify areas for development. (Pure Manchester)
Georgia Apontua’s University of Essex/Tavistock doctoral research recommends that Educational Psychology Services could consider using the Six Stages Framework or other anti-racist tools to help individuals examine their role in racial inequity and support colleagues experiencing racism.
Zoe Ebanks at the University of East London and Hannah Whiteley at the University of Manchester provide further examples of doctoral research citing the 2022 SSF book. Ebanks’s 2026 peer-reviewed journal article also cites the book and the earlier 1999 research by Bolton and M’gadzah. (UEL Repository; Educational & Child Psychology, 2026)
Dr M’gadzah’s wider anti-racism scholarship is also cited within doctoral work by researchers including Alice Bateman at the University of East London and Sathya Gunetilleke at the University of Bristol. These citations are distinguished from direct research use of the SSF. (University of East London Repository)
Published Practice Application of an SSF Tool
Cunningham and Collison (2026) report the use of Dr M’gadzah’s Racism Prejudice Spectrum within a targeted racial inclusion and wellbeing programme for Black-identifying students in a predominantly white school. The published article describes its use in reflection on and tracking experiences of racial discrimination. This provides a peer-reviewed account of practical application of an SSF tool, while leaving questions about the distinct contribution, reliability and validity of the tool open for further study.
Source: Peer-reviewed BPS article (Cunningham & Collison, 2026)
Collaborative and Supervised Research
At Grinnell College, Grace Marsh used the Six Stages Framework as an analytical lens within university research examining ideological shifts relating to racism, homophobia and ableism. Dr Shungu M’gadzah served as Research Supervisor and SSF collaborator. The research was presented at the 2024 Midwest Sociological Society Annual Meeting. (MSS)
Current doctoral research by Portia Hazelwood at the University of Southampton is exploring social capital and authentic belonging for Black children within British schools through participatory action research. SSF concepts and tools form part of the developing research approach, with Dr Shungu M’gadzah contributing in a research-supervision and collaborative capacity.
These collaborative projects demonstrate emerging applications of the framework while remaining distinct from independent empirical validation.
This is an emerging research record, not a finished evidence base.
That distinction matters.
The purpose of Research with the SSF is to help the next stage of development become increasingly independent, empirical, interdisciplinary and open to scrutiny.
Explore the full Research, Publications & Academic Impact record
For Doctoral Researchers and EPs in Training
You do not need to begin with a fully developed SSF research proposal.
You may simply have encountered an aspect of the framework that connects with a question you are already asking.
You might be researching belonging and wondering whether the SSF offers a useful conceptual lens. You might be examining anti-racist Educational Psychology practice, psychological safety, leadership or professional decision-making. You might want to investigate whether one SSF concept can be measured. Or your emerging findings may appear to challenge an assumption within the framework.
These are precisely the kinds of questions from which worthwhile research can develop.
Where appropriate, Dr M’gadzah may be able to provide an exploratory discussion about the framework, relevant publications, intellectual-property considerations and aspects of the SSF that may warrant further investigation.
Formal doctoral supervision, institutional research governance and ethical oversight remain the responsibility of the researcher’s university and supervisory team unless a specific formal collaborative arrangement has been agreed.
Research Collaboration
We welcome conversations with universities and research centres, Educational Psychology training programmes, academic supervisors, schools and Multi-Academy Trusts, Local Authorities, professional bodies, charities and community organisations, as well as researchers interested in interdisciplinary or international collaboration.
Future research may include doctoral studies, independent evaluations, collaborative projects, intervention research, longitudinal studies, measure development, programme evaluation and cross-institutional or cross-cultural work.
We are particularly interested in research that allows the SSF to encounter different disciplines, populations, cultures, methodological traditions and theoretical perspectives.
Research should not simply extend the reach of a framework.
It should extend our understanding.
Citation, Intellectual Property and Research Integrity
Researchers are encouraged to cite the original SSF source relevant to the concepts they are using.
For the principal book-length account of the original framework:
M’gadzah, S. H. (2022). Understanding and Dealing with Everyday Racism: The Six Stages Framework.
For an academic application of the SSF within higher education:
Dempsey, A., M’gadzah, S. H., & Watson, S. D. (2022). Diversity and Racism in Higher Education: The Six Stages Framework. In E. Meletiadou (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Practices for Advancing Diversity and Inclusion in Higher Education. IGI Global. DOI: 10.4018/978-1-7998-9628-9.ch018.
Researchers remain academically responsible for the design, ethics, analysis, interpretation and conclusions of their research.
Normal academic citation, critique and discussion of published SSF concepts do not require conclusions to be approved by the Six Stages Framework or Dr M’gadzah.
Some unpublished materials, proprietary assessment instruments, questionnaires, training resources, visual tools or adapted SSF resources may require permission before reproduction, modification or use in data collection.
If you are unsure whether permission is required, please contact us before beginning data collection.
Already Using or Citing the SSF?
We are building a living record of research relating to the Six Stages Framework.
If you have cited the SSF or Dr Shungu Hilda M’gadzah in a thesis or publication, used the framework as a conceptual or analytical lens, applied an SSF concept or tool within research, presented SSF-related research at a conference, or are currently undertaking research involving the framework, we would be pleased to hear from you.
This helps us understand how the framework is being interpreted, applied and challenged and enables relevant work to be considered for inclusion within the Research, Publications & Academic Impact record.
Interested in Researching with the SSF?
You may be at the beginning of an idea, considering whether an SSF concept could support your research, or already using the framework within an established project.
Please contact us to request the short Research with the SSF Expression of Interest Form.
The form helps us understand your research interests, the aspect of the framework you are considering and the type of information, discussion or collaboration you are seeking.
BUTTON: Contact Us to Request a Research Form
Building the Evidence Together
The Six Stages Framework began with a question about how people come to understand and challenge racism.
That question opened others.
How do people change?
Why do some people become more curious while others become more defensive?
What helps awareness become action?
How does belonging become possible across difference?
How do individual responses interact with relationships, groups and organisational systems?
What contributes to increasingly entrenched thinking?
What allows movement to occur in another direction?
The next stage in the development of the SSF cannot come from one person alone.
It requires researchers willing to apply it, test it, question it, challenge it and help us understand what the evidence says.
Interested in contributing to the next stage of SSF research?
BUTTON: Request the Research with the SSF Expression of Interest Form
