Advertisement

American Journal of Community Psychology

, Volume 21, Issue 5, pp 561–569 | Cite as

Methodological issues in prevention research: An introduction to the special issue

  • Mary A. Jansen
  • Elaine M. Johnson
Article

Abstract

In recent years increased attention has been directed to prevention research as a means of solving the multitude of complex social and health problems which confront individuals and their societies. Abuse of substances, behavioral dysfunctions, violence, emotional disorders, educational failures, unwanted pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases are but a few examples of these most difficult problems. As our recognition of the need for sound prevention strategies has grown, so has our sophistication in designing prevention research studies to evaluate the effectiveness of these new strategies. And that sophistication has brought new challenges, some of which are capable of stifling progress because of their complexity. This problem is certain to grow in importance as interventions with multiple components are used more frequently to meet the challenges of the complex social and health problems we face. This special issue evolved out of the recognition that prevention researchers are confronted by a myriad of difficult methodological issues which have inhibited progress in this area. The articles in the issue present innovative methodological solutions designed to overcome these problems so the field can move forward.

Key words

prevention research methodology 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aral, S., Wasserheit, J., Green, S., Judson, F., Sparling, P., & the NIAID Study Group on Integrated Behavioral Research for Prevention and Control of Sexually Transmitted Diseases (1990). Part III: Issues in evaluating behavioral interventions.Sexually Transmitted Diseases, 17(4), 208–210.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Bentler, P. (1991). Modeling of intervention effects. In C. Leukefeld and W. Bukoski W. (Eds.),Drug abuse prevention intervention research: Methodological issues. Washington, D.C.: Department of Health and Human Services, National Institute on Drug Abuse, Research Monograph Number 107.Google Scholar
  3. Biglan, A., & Ary, D. (1985). Methodological issues in research on smoking prevention. In C. Bell and R. Battjes (Eds.),Prevention research: Deterring drug abuse among children and adolescents. Washington, D.C.: Department of Health and Human Services, National Institute on Drug Abuse, Research Monograph Number 63.Google Scholar
  4. Biglan, A., Severson, H., Ary, D., Faller, C., Gallison, C., Thompson, R., Glasgow, R. & Lichtenstein, E. (1987). Do smoking prevention programs really work? Attrition and the internal and external validity of an evaluation of a refusal skills training program.Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 10(2), 159–171.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Biglan, A., Hood, D., Brozovsky, P., Ochs, L., Ary, D., & Black, C. (1991). Subject attrition in prevention research. In C. Leukefeld and W. Bukoski (Eds.),Drug abuse prevention intervention research: Methodological issues. Washington, D.C.: Department of Health and Human Services, National Institute on Drug Abuse, Research Monograph Number 107.Google Scholar
  6. Brown, C. (1991). Comparison of mediational selected strategies and sequential designs for preventive trials: Comments on a proposal by Pillow et al.American Journal of Community Psychology, 19(4), 837–846.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Buring, J., & Hennekens, C. (1989). Methodologic issues in the design of primary prevention trials.Progress in Clinical Biologic Research, 293, 41–49.Google Scholar
  8. Clayton, R., & Cattarello, A. (1991). Prevention intervention research: challenges and opportunities. In C. Leukefeld and W. Bukoski (Eds.),Drug abuse prevention intervention research: Methodological issues. Washington, D.C.: Department of Health and Human Services, National Institute on Drug Abuse, Research Monograph Number 107.Google Scholar
  9. Cook, T. (1985). Priorities in research in smoking prevention. In C. Bell and R. Battjes (Eds.),Prevention research: Deterring drug abuse among children and adolescents. Washington, D.C.: Department of Health and Human Services, National Institute on Drug Abuse, Research Monograph Number 63.Google Scholar
  10. Flay, B., & Petraitis, J. (1991). Methodological issues in drug use prevention research: theoretical foundations. In C. Leukefeld and W. Bukoski (Eds.),Drug abuse prevention intervention research: Methodological issues. Washington, D.C.: Department of Health and Human Services, National Institute on Drug Abuse, Research Monograph Number 107.Google Scholar
  11. Hansen, W., Collins, L., Malotte, C., & Johnson, C. (1983). Attrition in Prevention Research. Paper presented at the 91st Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, Anaheim, CA.Google Scholar
  12. Hawkins, J., Abbott, R., Catalano, R., & Gillmore, M. (1991). Assessing effectiveness of drug abuse prevention: Implementation issues relevant to long-term effects and replication. In C. Leukefeld and W. Bukoski (Eds.),Drug abuse prevention intervention research: Methodological issues. Washington, D.C.: Department of Health and Human Services, National Institute on Drug Abuse, Research Monograph Number 107.Google Scholar
  13. Kaplan, H. (1989). Methodological problems in the study of psychosocial influences on the AIDS process.Social Science Medicine, 29(3), 277–292.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Koepsell, T., Martin, D., Diehr, P., Psaty, B., Wagner, E., Perrin, E., & Cheadle, A. (1991). Data analysis and sample size issues in evaluations of community-based health promotion and disease prevention programs: A mixed-model analysis of variance approach.Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 44(7), 107–113.Google Scholar
  15. Koretz, D. (1991). Prevention-centered science in mental health.American Journal of Community Psychology, 19(4), 453–458.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Leukefeld, C., & Bukoski, W. (1991a). Drug abuse prevention evaluation methodology: A bright future.Journal of Drug Education, 21(3), 191–201.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Leukefeld, C., & Bukoski, W. (1991b). Prevention evaluation research methods: Findings and consensus. In C. Leukefeld and W. Bukoski (Eds.),Drug abuse prevention intervention research: Methodological issues. Washington, D.C.: Department of Health and Human Services, National Institute on Drug Abuse, Research Monograph Number 107.Google Scholar
  18. Lorion, R. (1991). Targeting preventive interventions: Enhancing risk estimates through theory.American Journal of Community Psychology, 19(6), 859–865.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Lorion, R., Price, R., & Eaton, W. (1989). The prevention of child and adolescent disorders: from theory to research. In D. Shaffer, I. Philips, and N. Enzer (Eds.),Prevention of mental disorders, alcohol and other drug use in children and adolescents. Washington, D.C.: Department of Health and Human Services, Office for Substance Abuse Prevention, Monograph Number 2.Google Scholar
  20. Pentz, M., & Trebow, E. (1991). Implementation issues in drug abuse prevention research. In C. Leukefeld and W. Bukoski (Eds.),Drug abuse prevention intervention research: Methodological issues. Washington, D.C.: Department of Health and Human Services, National Institute on Drug Abuse, Research Monograph Number 107.Google Scholar
  21. Pillow, D., Sandler, I., Braver, S., Wolchik, S., & Gersten, J. (1991). Theory-based screening for prevention: focussing on mediating processes in children of divorce.American Journal of Community Psychology, 19(4), 809–836.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Sandler, I., Braver, S., Wolchik, S., Pillow, D., & Gersten, J. (1991). Small theory and the strategic choices of prevention research.American Journal of Community Psychology, 19(6), 873–880.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Stein, R., Bauman, L., & Ireys, H. (1991). Who enrolls in prevention trials? Discordance in perception of risk by professionals and participants.American Journal of Community Psychology, 19(4), 603–617.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mary A. Jansen
    • 1
  • Elaine M. Johnson
    • 1
  1. 1.U.S. Department of Health and Human ServicesUSA

Personalised recommendations