Je vertrek voorbereiden of je verzekering afsluiten bij studie, stage of onderzoek in het buitenland
Study or work abroad? check your insurance options with The JoHo Foundation
Social psychology is a science that tries to build knowledge through experiments and measurements. Although social psychology cannot explain social problems, it can be used to find solutions. Based on a social problem, the upcoming chapter shows how a theoretical model is developed on which an intervention is based. This will be done using the PATH (Problem, Analysis, Test, Help) method.
It has become apparent that in recent years fewer and fewer people give donations to reduce HIV / AIDS in high-risk areas such as Africa. A group of volunteers would like to start a campaign that will make people donate more money. They are struggling to determine what this campaign should look like. For this, they engaged a social psychologist to gain insight into what would prompt people to donate more money. The psychologist will start with the first step of the PATH method: formulating a problem definition. The psychologist defines the problem as follows: many people in Africa suffer from HIV / AIDS and there is not enough funding to provide them with adequate forms of medical or psychological assistance. What factors determine the willingness of potential donors to donate for this issue? How can we set up a fundraising campaign to help people living with HIV / AIDS?
To define the factors influencing people's willingness to donate money, the psychologist asks many questions that can be answered based on literature on social psychology. He looks at literature on altruism, pro social behavior and social influence.
First, the psychologist looks at the literature on pro-social behavior and formulates the problem in terms of two general questions:
After researching literature that can answer these questions, the psychologist comes to the conclusion that there are three different kinds of help:
Although there is much less literature on the latter form of help, the psychologist eventually comes to Shalom Schwartz's model. This is a theoretical model applicable to all forms of helping. In the model there are several steps that influence people's pro-social behavior. These are the most important steps:
In addition, it can also be found in literature that people with a disease arouse more sympathy when they are not considered responsible for their fate. Based on this, the psychologist concludes that one of the main goals of the campaign must be to suppress the idea that people in Africa with HIV / AIDS are themselves responsible for their illness. A sense of empathy must also be evoked in potential donors. This happens when people can identify with the victims. For example, because they have the same age, position or values.
The volunteer team states that people can react differently to victims or disasters abroad than in their own country. Here comes the German psychologist Leon Montada. He argues that helping is not related to empathy, but to personal standards and one's sense of responsibility to help. This sense of responsibility is caused by the guilt of people with privileged lives, anger at inequality in the world and the perception that people in poor countries are not responsible for their fate. After feeding this theory back to the volunteer team, they focus more on the injustice that HIV / AIDS victims receive in third world countries and that poverty and inadequate health care mean that help for people with HIV / AIDS is very much needed.
By formulating these, the psychologist takes into account the following theory: the theory of "belief in a just world". This is a theory of Canadian social psychologist Melvin Lerner, who argues that people have a natural tendency to believe that they live in a fair world where everyone gets what they deserve. For example, people are especially upset by the unexplained leading of others. Based on all the findings obtained from the social psychological literature, the psychologist creates a process model.
One problem is that not enough research has been done into the relationship between guilt and helping, so it is not possible to make firm statements about this. Many issues are therefore twofold and cannot be incorporated into the campaign with certainty. For example, HIV / AIDS is a disease that people say is indeed the fault of the person concerned (it could have been prevented through safe sexual contact). It is therefore not certain whether these views will work in the campaign.
The team of volunteers now has several factors that can increase help behavior. The campaign will look like this:
The PATH method helps social psychologists to develop a theoretically based intervention program relatively quickly and easily. However, there are some pitfalls. For example, it can take a long time to define a problem, and a lot of deliberation to identify the most important elements of the problem. In addition, it may be that there is not much relevant literature or too much relevant literature on the subject. Even if these have worked in the past, that does not guarantee success next time.
The PATH method can be explained in four main steps:
The problem definition is usually much more extensive than that in the example about HIV / AIDS. This is because the team of volunteers were already a step further: they felt that more attention should be paid to the HIV / AIDS problem and started a campaign to this end. Usually a psychologist starts more at the root of a problem when a problem definition needs to be formed. For this it is very important that it is well described what the problem is. Once this has happened, there are many other questions to ask: why is it actually a problem and who is it a problem for? In addition, the main causes of the problem must be identified. The target group to which the intervention will be applied must also be determined. Finally, the "key aspects" must be found. This means that a good problem definition makes it clear that the problem is an applied form rather than a basic form and is formulated in concrete terms. It is also important here that the problem has social psychological aspects and that the problem is solvable. If a problem cannot be defined by a few terms, it is probably not suitable for a PATH analysis.
When the problem is defined in terms of one or more social psychological constructs, the second step is to come up with a social psychological explanation of the problem. For this, it must first be determined what the outcome variable is: which variable must ultimately be changed?
Sometimes it is not so obvious what to look for in the literature. Even when this is clear, there can be many different theories. For example, there are "social exchange" and "reciprocity" theories. These theories emphasize the role of selfishness in helping. In this way people feel good when they have done something for someone else. In addition, there are empathy-altruism theories. The basic idea of this theory is that empathy motivates altruistic behaviors aimed at alleviating the suffering of a victim.
In order to determine the validity of social psychological theories, it is important to determine to what extent the experiments used for the theory are applicable to the real world. This refers to the external validity of an experiment. It is possible that the findings of a study, due to the specific research question or limitations in the samples, are applicable to a limited number of real-life situations.
The process model has an outcome variable that is affected. The model must mainly contain variables that can be influenced and must describe the relationship between the variables in the form of a process model. This process model is the core of the PATH method. In general, the model only specifies a few possible relationships between the variables. This forces researchers to be selective, so that not everything is explained by everything. It is sometimes difficult to find in the literature how certain variables influence each other. If nothing can be found about a specific variable, it is good to look at the more general form of the variable concerned.
This is the most difficult step in the process. It is important that the intervention program mainly contains factors that can be influenced by intervention. Many social psychological variables, such as attitudes and social norms, can be influenced by interventions, but factors such as sex, personality or other deeply rooted traits or values cannot. The step from testing to intervention is a very big one. The psychologist must devise as many intervention programs as possible. Especially the shaping of the details takes a lot of work.
It is difficult to apply social psychological theories to social problems, because many theories have been developed through laboratory experiments. The following limitations will now be discussed: oversimplification, external validity and conflicting evidence.
The situation that is investigated through experiments is by definition a reduction and simplification of reality. A laboratory experiment can never encompass the complexity of variables that influence human behavior. In such experiments, often only one of the many variables is investigated.
Another limitation is that in real life all factors can cover the impact of the variables that are very clearly manipulated in an experiment. This makes it difficult to apply the findings of certain studies to real-life situations.
Another limitation is that studies often produce conflicting findings. For example, an effect can be found in one study, but it is not found when the study is carried out by someone else at a different time. This is often due to the fact that the studies differ slightly in terms of their methodology. So this shows that when the circumstances are not exactly the same, people can quickly react differently to a similar situation.
A problem definition means a clear and precise description of what the problem is, why it is a problem, and for whom it is a problem. The target group must also be defined for the intervention. In addition, the problem definition must provide insight into possible causes and important aspects of the problem. For example, whether the particular problem is an applied, concrete and social psychological problem, and whether the problem can be solved.
Many studies in social psychology pay little attention to formulating the problem. One reason for this is that a lot of research has been done on basic social psychology. For example, within empathy-altruism research, the circumstances under which people are inclined to help others are examined. No further attention is paid here to the application of the findings. In addition, studies where there is an applied focus often lack a systematic problem analysis.
The newspaper always contains headlines that often indicate a problem. However, the disadvantage is that these slogans are often not well formulated. Without a systematic problem analysis, it is often not clear what the problem is. Global propositions must be made more concrete in order to be further investigated. It is also possible that a more detailed problem analysis can discover the real problem instead of the problem that has been formulated. When the problem is clearly articulated, there are a variety of possible solutions. In some cases, this may indicate that a social psychological intervention is not appropriate.
As the above information shows, there is not one way from the problem to a problem definition. It is important to note that applied social researchers have their own preferences for subjects and theories and therefore approach the problem in their own way. This can cause one researcher to focus on a completely different aspect of the subject than another researcher. It is good to be aware that such tendencies can give a certain color to a problem analysis.
Related to this; a psychologist may be approached by a client with a particular problem. It is then up to the psychologist to determine whether the problem is actually a problem, or whether it is actually another problem. It is therefore the psychologist's job to convince his or her client what the real problem is. If this fails, the psychologist must take his or her hands off the assignment.
During a conversation with the client it is important that there is good questioning to discover the real problem. It is also important to consider how many aspects a problem consists of. It may also be possible that there are several problems. To do this, look for the biggest problem and link the smaller problems to it.
The most relevant questions are:
A good introductory problem definition is one that incorporates all of the above questions. In a conversation with a client, many more questions are asked to create a complete problem definition.
There are several reasons why it is important to develop a good problem definition. In this way, it delineates what needs to be explained and gives suggestions for finding the correct literature. Based on a good problem definition, it is easier to proceed to the next level, develop and test an explanatory model. In addition, it is almost impossible to develop good interventions without a good problem definition, because the essence of the problem is probably missing.
The main issue here is determining the central problem to be solved. To answer this question, insight is needed into the cause and background of the problem. With many problem definitions, it is not always clear what the essence of the problem is. In a conversation with a client, the psychologist should always be critical of what the client is saying and he or she should be open to possible other causes of a particular problem. In addition, problems may often be stated too broadly or generally. In this way, it is not possible to deal with the problem effectively.
This is an important question for the psychologist to ask. How does the problem manifest itself? What are the consequences of the problem? What makes it problematic? When did it first occur? Answering the why question not only helps in specifying the problem, but it can also provide guidance for a possible intervention program.
It can be difficult with what problem the client is facing. It is important to find a fundamental solution. Clients sometimes do not see the actual problem, so if a solution is sought for their problem, it often only works temporarily.
It is also important to ask when exactly the problem arose. In this way, the psychologist can make a historical analysis that can explain various things about the problem. First, it can reveal that the problem suggested is not the actual problem. Second, such an analysis can point to a specific time when the problem occurred. Third, it can give reasons why the problem suddenly got worse.
It is important to know if only the client is involved in the problem, or if more parties are involved. Usually other parties are involved. It is then important to investigate whether the client's problem definition matches that of the other parties. When these are contradictory, it is difficult for a psychologist to accept the assignment. He or she must then try to formulate a problem definition that everyone can agree with.
With this question, the psychologist can draw a picture of the background and the possible causes of the problem. In addition, it can be determined whether the problem has a social psychological dimension. If so, this can be used to create a preliminary causal model. Remember, the purpose of creating a problem definition is not to define the exact causes. It is important to get an impression of the causal model and the possible social psychological processes involved. Making a preliminary causal model can be facilitated by asking two questions:
It is also important to distinguish between direct (immediate) causes and more indirect (distal) causes. In this way a model of the causal process can be made.
Who should be convinced of the problem? Whose cooperation is needed to solve the problem? Selecting a target group reduces the number of people involved in the problem.
It explains the problem and makes it more specific. This makes it easier to come up with strategies for the solution. If the psychologist finds out later in the process that the target group is too difficult or expensive, he or she can always redefine the problem. Remember that the PATH model is a flexible model.
To understand the main aspects of the problem, the following questions should be asked:
Finding an effective solution to a problem is not the main goal of basic research in psychology, but it is the priority of applied psychological research. It is therefore important that the question "Why is it a problem" also includes a question about how a particular problem can be solved. It is not always clear at the beginning what the intervention program will look like.
It is also important that a problem is formulated in enough concrete terms. All important aspects must be well operationalized to be useful. When behavior is operationalized, it is easier to recognize and tackle. It is also good to specify the characteristics of the target group. This makes it easier to evaluate whether an intervention was successful or not. Finally, someone must indicate a specific behavior that needs to be changed. It is necessary to know what the normative behavior of a particular target group is.
This question is answered, at least in part, by the above questions. Here are two questions to consider:
The social psychologist must determine whether a particular problem can be solved or not. This depends on the nature of the problem, the efficiency of the solution, but also depends on the client. For example, a client may not agree with a particular intervention program because of the costs. In addition, it must always be checked whether a particular solution is ethically responsible.
The main goal of research at this stage is to better understand the problem and its possible causes, as well as estimate the success of an intervention. In this phase we are not yet concerned with an empirical test of the causal model or an evaluation of the intervention program.
Exploratory research is often desirable for the problem definition because it offers the certainty that the social psychologist will not make mistakes in identifying the causes and / or solutions of the problem.
There are several ways available to gather information about a problem.
Major social issues are appearing in the newspaper and on television and it may be worth consulting these forms of media. In addition, it is advisable to also consult the internet. It is good to remember that information from the client alone is not enough as it may be incomplete. To gain more insight into a problem, various sources must be consulted.
It is good to do a "review" of the scientific literature available on a topic so far. For example, PsychINFO, PsychARTICLES or Google SCOLAR can be consulted.
In the problem phase, the main goal is to generate as many ideas as possible about the possible antecedents of the problem, which facilitate the creation of a causal model.
It is always good to arrange interviews with the people experiencing the problem. This gives a better picture of how people experience the problem. This helps to define a problem definition that everyone can agree with. These interviews should contain a few elements so that they are actually useful:
The disadvantage of interviews is that outcomes can differ greatly between people. This may be because some people are not telling the truth. In that case, observation can be used. There are several methods of observation:
A problem definition usually consists of one paragraph that describes the main elements of the problem in a fluid and coherent manner. All questions are answered here in full, but not as a list. It must be clear what the problem is, why it arose, for whom it is a problem, what the main causes are, the target group and relevant problem aspects.
A problem definition means a clear and precise description of what the problem is, why it is a problem, and for whom it is a problem. The target group must also be defined for the intervention. In addition, the problem definition must provide insight into possible causes and important aspects of the problem. For example, whether the particular problem is an applied, concrete and social psychological problem, and whether the problem can be solved.
Many studies in social psychology pay little attention to formulating the problem. One reason for this is that a lot of research has been done on basic social psychology. For example, within empathy-altruism research, the circumstances under which people are inclined to help others are examined. No further attention is paid here to the application of the findings. In addition, studies where there is an applied focus often lack a systematic problem analysis.
In this phase, the outcome variable must be defined first, this is the variable that must be changed. After that, as many explanations as possible are found in the divergent phase. These explanations are linked to relevant social psychological theories. Finally, in the convergent phase, the statements are evaluated for their relevance, validity, and probability of the problem.
The first goal in the analysis phase is to specify the outcome variable to clarify the target behaviour for intervention. Ideally, the outcome variable is formulated in terms of the desired state. The literature distinguishes three different social psychological variables:
Initially, it is desirable that there is only one outcome variable. This is because variables can be strongly related to each other, so a change in one variable causes a change in the other. When variables are not related, it is because they have a different ontogenetic history. For this they need various explanations and interventions.
To affect a charity, an outcome variable must meet the following criteria:
The outcome variable should logically arise form the problem definition. In an ideal scenario, it should reflect the desired state.
In the PATH model, the outcome variable must be described as concretely as possible. This is important because too general an outcome variable makes it difficult to develop an effective intervention program. You then run the risk of influencing aspects of the variable that are not problematic.
The variable must be continuous so that it can be described in quantitative terms (more or less than…). Firstly, it makes it easier to generate explanations for the problem and to describe the causal model. Secondly, a quantitative variable also makes it easier to evaluate an intervention program. The state before and the state after the intervention are easy to compare.
The second step in the analysis phase is to find as many explanations as possible and identify relevant causes of the problem. There are a few things to keep in mind here. First, the validity of the statements doesn’t really matter at this point. It is more important to ensure that all aspects of the problem are explained. Second, the social psychologist should focus on explanations for possible differences in the outcome variable.
There are several methods of finding explanations:
With free association, it is important that as many explanations as possible are initially thought up. Subsequently, the validity is examined, and the most favourable explanations are chosen. Moreover, finding an explanation in free association can lead to finding another explanation that logically follows form the first.
Different types of associations are distinguished: problem association, concept association, and taking perspective.
Interviews and observations are also useful during the analysis phase. However, they are more specific in this phase, because they arise from the chosen outcome variable(s).
A specific interview method to find explanations is the “why interview”. This can be a real interview with the parties involved, but it can also be an exercise for the psychologist to come up with different explanations for himself. These interviews are more detailed than the interviews discussed in the problem phase. In these conversations, care must be taken to ensure that the questions are not always asked in the same way.
The explanatory model can be presented in a figure:
This means that you go back on the causal chain, bottom-up, from the outcome variable to a possible obstacle. This model is not yet complete and can still raise many “why questions”. It is good to be complete and not focus on one set of statements. Focusing on the most relevant explanations does not take place until the convergent phase.
In the analysis phase, a more systematic observation is used than in the problem phase. A distinction can be made between observation of others and self-observation (introspection). In the case of an observation, the social psychologist observes a process in a group or organization. The SYMLOG, a group observation tool, can be used. The SYMLOG tool consists of 26 attributes that are given to each group member. For example: active, dominant, talks a lot. The psychologist must score the person per item on a three-point scale: 1 = rarely, 2 = sometimes, 3 = often. These scores are then combined for each group member on three dimensions: dominant-submissive, friendly-unfriendly, and instrumentally controlled=emotionally expressive. With this data a graphical representation of the group is given.
In introspective methods, group members may be asked to judge themselves and how they respond to others.
A third method for finding explanations is through social psychological literature. Social psychological theories, usually based on a large number of studies, specify the possible causes of social behavior, such as aggression, altruism, leadership, status, conformity, and prejudice. Th two methods of explanation generation, taking association and perspective, often give an idea of which theories are relevant and which are not. Remember than in the analysis phase, these theories are mainly used as a heuristic to make a causal explanatory model. In the following phase of the PATH model, the test phase, the theories are examined more thoroughly.
There are three different strategies for finding explanations from social psychological literature:
In the convergent phase, the number of explanations is reduced, so that only the most plausible explanations remain. There are three different steps in this phase.
In this phase, the outcome variable must be defined first, this is the variable that must be changed. After that, as many explanations as possible are found in the divergent phase. These explanations are linked to relevant social psychological theories. Finally, in the convergent phase, the statements are evaluated for their relevance, validity, and probability of the problem.
When social psychologists choose a set of explanations, they create process model. This model serves as a template for developing interventions.
A process model is an illustrated representation of the explanatory variables and their relationships with each other and with the overarching problem. Each variable is represented by a square. The squares (variables) in the model are connected by arrows. The binding power of an arrow indicates whether there is a positive (+) or negative (-) relationship between the two variables. Formulating a process model helps social psychologists to paint a structured picture of the problem with the underlying causes. It should also provide guidance on which interventions to use.
First, there must be a clear outcome variable. Ideally, this has already been done in the previous phase of the PATH method, but there may be doubts as to whether the outcome variable is concrete enough or not. Subsequently, a diagram must be made of the preparatory process model. The outcome variable is placed in the right square and the possible explanations in the left square.
Possible explanation of outcome variable:
This is a plausible first model, but there are several problems. First, the statement is not usually described as a continuous or quantitative variable. It is unclear how this variable can vary from less to more, and how exactly it is related to the outcome variable. Second, the variables are often too general. An improved model would use more concrete terms to describe the variables. In the figure below, the above variables are made concrete and relationships are specified.
This model is already a great improvement over the first, but details of the process that led to the manifestation of the problem are still lacking. For example, it is not clear whether the variables on the left have a direct or indirect influence on the problem. Additionally, the variables introduced in the second figure can be caused by other factors. An even better process model would look like this:
This is one possible way to develop a process model, but it is by no means the only way. In general, it takes a lot of time and adjustments to make one as accurate as possible. It is worthwhile to invest a lot of time here, because a good process model provides good recommendations about the nature of the interventions that are needed.
While there is no one way to create a process model, there are several heuristics that can help. The following 11 rules of thumb can help you develop a process model:
When choosing the right theory or set of theories, the social psychologist probably already knows the empirical background. For example, the empirical literature indicates the strength and direction of the relationships between the variables in the model. Meta-analyses and review articles are very useful because they summarize the results of the different studies. Based on this, the correlations between the variables can be established in the process model (the research must therefore also investigate the direction of the relationship). Studies can contradict each other. In the method part of the research, it must then be examined which research most closely matches the situation for which the process model is being made.
It can be difficult to find relevant literature that provides evidence for the relationships between different variables. Firstly, this is because not all research is published. Second, not all studies are of the same relevance and quality. Third, studies can contradict each other in their results or conclusions. For this it is best to consult meta-analyses or review articles.
as indicated earlier, it is possible that no research has yet been conducted into a relationship between variables. It is also possible that a study is of poor quality or does not fully cover what knowledge is needed. In this case, the social psychologist must be able to conduct his own research to find out this relationship. In addition, many studies in social psychology are “laboratory based”. This means that these results are reliable, but not usually easy to generalize. When conducting research to establish validity, it can be helpful to conduct a quick survey (questionnaire). The most important variables are operationalized and measured, after which they undergo statistical procedures. In this way, the relationship between the variables is established.
When social psychologists choose a set of explanations, they create process model. This model serves as a template for developing interventions.
When all factors causing the outcome variables have been identified, an intervention can be performed. An intervention is used to change the causal factors and thus manage the outcome variable. However, it is sometimes not necessary to change all causal factors, so the first step in the help phase is to determine which factors to change. The adaptability of the factors and the effect size of the intervention determine this choice. It must then be determined how the target group will be reached and what the content of the intervention will be. The content of the intervention is mainly based on empirical evidence. The last step in the help phase is the implementation process. This chapter only provides an introduction to developing an intervention.
As described above, it is not always necessary, appropriate or possible to adjust all factors in the explanatory model. Therefore, the social psychologist chooses the factors that are modifiable and have the greatest effect on the outcome variable. For this it is useful to balance all factors of the process model.
There are three questions that can help rule out factors that are difficult to change:
To determine which variables have the greatest effect on the outcome variable, the socio-psychological literature should be consulted. If no information can be found in this literature, there are several ways to estimate the effect size. This makes it possible to look at past experiences with comparable situations.
A balance sheet helps determine which factors will be used for the intervention. A psychologist will evaluate all variables from the process model for their adaptability and effect size. It looks like this:
Variables form the process model Modifiability Effect Size
Note: With regard to modifiability: ++ = high modifiable; + = medium modifiable; 0 = low modifiable; - = not modifiable; +/0 = depends on another variable.
With regard to the effect size: ++ = large effect; + = moderate effect; 0 = small effect; - = no effect; +/0 = depends on another variable.
Using this table, the psychologist can determine which factors need to be changed to change the outcome variable.
Three tasks can be distinguished when developing an intervention:
The channel, methods and strategy must always take the target audience into account. It is good to remember that developing an intervention is a dynamic process: choices for the channel, the methods and the strategy are always made in combination with each other.
The channel is the means by which people are reached and the intended change sonly take place when people are exposed to this channel. Examples are: flyers, magazines internet, television, group training and structural environmental changes.
The channel is chosen based on information about the target audience, the relevant variables, methods and strategies. The following issues should be considered when choosing a channel:
Methods often arise form theoretical frameworks. The choice of a method depends on the balance model. An intervention method must be chosen for each variable. In addition, it depends to what extent the method fits the variable to be changed. Some channels can motivate people by showing the desired behaviour, but they cannot teach them how to change their behaviour.
The following methods are commonly used in psychological interventions:
Methods must be translated into a specific strategy. The strategy is the actual intervention people are exposed to. To devise strategies, a global intervention plan can be drawn up by specifying the methods, channels, target groups and variables that need to be changed. Then the strategy is determined. This usually happens in two phases: the divergent and a convergent phase. In the divergent phase, the psychologist makes as many strategies as possible, and in the convergent phase, all of these strategies are critically assessed.
There are several ways to generate interventions:
The divergent phase often results in a laundry list of strategies. The choice of a particular strategy or set of strategies must be made on a theoretical and empirical basis. First, the strategy must take into account the preconditions of the theory (for example, relevant to the target group). Second, it is desirable that the chosen strategy be based on empirical evidence from laboratory experiments or field studies. Ideally, evidence should e available for the combination of the channel, method, strategy, variable to be changed, and target audience.
Sometimes there is no evidence for the effectiveness of a particular strategy. Certainly, if the costs of an intervention program are high, it is recommended to first investigate its effectiveness.
Once the strategy(s) has been chosen, the interventions can take shape. When it comes to visuals, this is often done in collaboration with a professional graphic designer. Here are a few rules of thumb for making material:
The main purpose of this is to avoid major design flaws. It doesn’t necessarily have to include a behavioural measurement. It must ensure that the target audience pays attention to and understands the message. The format of a pre-test is to expose the material to the target audience and to record and evaluate their answers. This can be done in various ways.
The implementation process has one important goal: to verify that the intervention is being used as intended. Implementation is not about the effects of the intervention, but about positioning the women in such a way that it can have effects. The major challenge of the implementation process is that the extent to which the target group is exposed to the intervention depends on the people and organizations involved in the distribution of the intervention. So while psychologists can create a perfect intervention program, it is highly dependent on the people who need to expose the interventions to the target audience. If this is not or hardly ever done, the effects will be very small or even non-existent.
The implementation process can be time consuming as communication and information exchange can take a long time. Rogers’ (1983) “Model of Diffusion of Innovation” describes how large-scale changes in the use of an innovation occur over time. This process is known as the diffusion process. The process consists of four stages, which are descried using a sample flyer for battered women to get professional help.
In the implementation process, all persons and organizations involved, their motivations and thresholds for carrying out their task in the implementation are recorded. Creating an implementation process consists of three steps:
The implementation plan includes al steps to be taken to encourage the actors to carry out their tasks in the implementation. When developing an implementation plan, the social psychologist must consider two factors:
This phase takes a lot of work. All involved (actors) must be approached to ensure that they are doing their part to achieve the goal. This can be by motivating them or by removing potential stumbling blocks.
In order to determine whether the identified problem as actually changed positively, an evaluation must take place at the end of the intervention cycle. At least three types of evaluation are important:
When all factors causing the outcome variables have been identified, an intervention can be performed. An intervention is used to change the causal factors and thus manage the outcome variable. However, it is sometimes not necessary to change all causal factors, so the first step in the help phase is to determine which factors to change. The adaptability of the factors and the effect size of the intervention determine this choice. It must then be determined how the target group will be reached and what the content of the intervention will be. The content of the intervention is mainly based on empirical evidence. The last step in the help phase is the implementation process. This chapter only provides an introduction to developing an intervention.
Je vertrek voorbereiden of je verzekering afsluiten bij studie, stage of onderzoek in het buitenland
Study or work abroad? check your insurance options with The JoHo Foundation
Add new contribution