Advertisement

Critical Issues in Theory for Health Promotion

  • David V. McQueen

Abstract

There are, of course, in the pursuit of science, all the classical reasons that stress the importance of theory. These will not be elaborated here because many do not apply to a field of work such as health promotion. Theory is probably most needed in order to help set the parameters for a scientific discipline, rather than a field of activity such as health promotion. Nonetheless theory serves a critical role in the conduct of most any activity and health promotion is no exception. Most critically, theory helps one avoid two types of error, one a narrow empiricism that concerns itself only with observation and the undirected collection of data and two an outlandish unanchored abstract thought that tries to address the entire range of understanding of the meaning of life. Health promotion practice is full of interventions, particularly at the community level, that are not anchored in any systematic theoretical approach. At the same time large conceptual ideas that are discussed in health promotion are equally found wanting an underlying theory. Finally theory anchors explanations in a field in the rich contextual efforts of many others who have thought long and hard about why social life is the way it is. A prime example is the discipline of sociology where a theoretical tradition has provided a rich source of explanation for phenomena ranging from socioeconomic status to globalization. To date there is no equivalent to this rich tradition in the field of health promotion. We have to create it.

Keywords

Health Promotion Health Belief Model Theoretical Underpinning Health Promotion Program Vital Debate 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Achinstein, P. (1968). Concepts of Science: A Philosphical Analysis. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press.Google Scholar
  2. Achinstein, P. (2004). The book of evidence. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Adrian, M., Layne, N., & Moreau, J. (1994). Can life expectancies be used to determine if health promotion works? American Journal of Health Promotion, 8, 449–461.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Allison, K., & Rootman, I. (1996). Scientific rigor and community participation in health promotion research: Are they compatible? Health Promotion International, 11, 333–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Appleyard, B. (1992). Understanding the present: Science and the soul of modern man. New York and London: Doubleday.Google Scholar
  6. Beck, U., Giddens, A., & Lash, S. (1994). Reflexive modernization: Politics, tradition and aesthetics in the modern social order. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Bhaskar, R. (1997). A realist theory of science (2nd ed.). New York: Verso.Google Scholar
  8. Bloor, D. (1991). Knowledge and social imagery (2nd ed.). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  9. Bunge, M. (1996). In praise of intolerance to charlatanism in academia. In P. R. Gross, N. Levitt, and M. W. Lewis (Eds.), The flight from science and reason (pp. 96–115). New York: New York Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
  10. Catford. (2004). Health promotion's record card: How principled are we 20 years on? Health Promotion International, 19, 1–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. CDC, Internet site for the Community Guide: http://www.health.gov/communityguide.Google Scholar
  12. Dean, K., & McQueen, D. V. (1996). Theory in health promotion. Health Promotion International, 11, 7–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ehring, D. (1997). Causation and persistence: A theory of causation. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  14. EWG, European Working Group on Health Promotion Evaluation. (1998). Health promotion evaluation: Recommendations to policymakers. Pamphlet, WHO (EURO), Health Canada, Ottawa.Google Scholar
  15. Gouldner, A. W. (1970). The coming crisis of western sociology. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  16. Gross, P. R., Levitt, N., & Lewis, M. W. (Eds.). (1997). The flight from science and reason. New York: New York Academy of Sciences (distributed by The John's Hopkins Press, Baltimore and London).Google Scholar
  17. Henrickson, L., & McKelvy, B. (2002). Foundations of “new” social science: Institutional legitimacy from philosophy, complexity science, postmodernism, and agent-based modeling. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 99, 7280–7295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. IUHPE. (1999). The evidence of health promotion effectiveness: A report for the European Commission by the International Union for Health Promotion and Education, ECSC-EC-EAEC, Brussels–Luxembourg.Google Scholar
  19. IUHPE. (2003). The New Public Health: A collection of video conversation with people who shape our thinking about health and health care (www.iuhpe.org).Google Scholar
  20. Jammer, M. (1999). Concepts of force (2nd ed.). Mineola, New York: Dover.Google Scholar
  21. Kirscht, J. (1974). Research related to the modification of health beliefs. Health Education Monographs, 2, 455–469.Google Scholar
  22. Latour, B. (1987). Science in action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Latour, B. (1999). Pandora's hope. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Latour, B. (2000). When things strike back: A possible contribution of “science studies” to the social sciences. British Journal of Sociology, 51, 107–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. MacDonald, G., et al. (1996). Evidence for success in health promotion: Suggestions for improvement. In D. Leathar (Ed.), Health education research: Theory and practice, 11, 367–376.Google Scholar
  26. McQueen, D. V. (1989a). Thoughts on the ideological origins of health promotion. Health Promotion International, 4, 339–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. McQueen, D. V. (1989b). Changing the public health, Edited by Research Unit in Health and Behavioural Change (chaps. 1 and 2, pp. 1–28). Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  28. McQueen, D. V. (1989c). Schools of Public Health in den USA—Erfahrungen und Zukunftsperpektiven. In B. Badura, T. Elkeles, B. Grieger, & W. Kammerer Zukunftsaufgabe Gesundheitsfoerderung, Landesverband der Betriebskrankenkassen in Berlin, Berlin, pp. 231–249.Google Scholar
  29. McQueen, D. V. (1990). Comprehensive approaches to health research. In Evelyne de Leeuw, Chris Breemer ter Stege, & Gaspard A de Jong (Eds.), Research for Healthy Cities, Proceedings of the International Conference on Research for Healthy Cities. Supplement TSG 11/90, The Hague, pp. 52–58.Google Scholar
  30. McQueen, D. V. (1991). The contribution of health promotion research to public health. European Journal of Public Health, 1, 22–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. McQueen, D. V. (1994). Health promotion in Canada: A European/British perspective with an emphasis on research. In A. P. Pederson, M. O'Neill, & I. Rootman (Eds.), Health promotion in Canada: Provincial, national and international perspectives (pp. 335–347). Toronto: W.B. Saunders.Google Scholar
  32. McQueen, D. V. (1996). The search for theory in health behaviour and health promotion. Health Promotion International, 11, 27–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. McQueen, D. V. (1998). Theory or cosmology: The basis for health promotion theory. In W. E. Thurston (Ed.), Doing health promotion research: The science of action (chap. 3, pp. 29–40). Calgary, Alberta, Canada: University of Calgary Press.Google Scholar
  34. McQueen, D. V. (2000). Perspectives on health promotion: theory, evidence, practice and the emergence of complexity. Health Promotion International, 15, 95–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. McQueen, D. V. (2001a). Sociology in public health. In Lester Breslow, et al. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of public health (pp. 1132–1134). New York: MacMillan.Google Scholar
  36. McQueen, D. V. (2001b). Strengthening the evidence base for health promotion. Health Promotion International, 16, 261–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. McQueen, D. V. (2002a). The evidence debate. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 56, 83–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. McQueen, D. V. (2002b). Social and behavioral sciences. In Lester Breslow, et al. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of public health (pp. 1111–1116). New York: MacMillan.Google Scholar
  39. McQueen, D. V., & Anderson, L. (2001). What counts as evidence: Issues and debates. In I. Rootman, M. Goodstadt, B. Hyndman, D. V. McQueen, L. Potvin, J. Springett, & E. Ziglio (Eds.), Evaluation in Health Promotion: Principles and Perspectives (pp. 63–81). Denmark: World Health Organization. (chap. 4, pp. 63–833). Reprinted in Debates and dilemmas in promoting health: A reader (2nd. ed.). In M. Sidell et al. (Ed.). Milton Keynes: Open University Press, 2002.Google Scholar
  40. Norman, R. M. (1986). The nature and correlates of health behavior. Ottawa, Canada: Department of Health and Welfare.Google Scholar
  41. Nutbeam, D. (1998). Evaluating health promotion—progress, problems, and solutions. Health Promotion International, 13, 27–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Poland, B. (1996). Knowledge development and evaluation in, of and for healthy community initiatives. Part I: guiding principles. Health Promotion International, 11, 237–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Rootman, I., Goodstadt, M., McQueen, D., et al. (Eds.). (2000). There is a shortage of evidence regarding the effectiveness of health promotion. Evaluation in health promotion: Principles and perspectives (chap. 24). Copenhagen: WHO (EURO).Google Scholar
  44. Rosen, L., Manor, O., & Englehard, D. (2006). In defense of the RCT for health promotion research. American Journal of Public Health, 96, 18–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Rosenau, P. M. (1992). Post-modernism and the social sciences. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Rosenstock, I. M. (1974). Historical origins of the Health Belief Model. Health Education Monographs, 2, 328–335.Google Scholar
  47. Sackett, D., et al. (1996). Evidence-based medicine: What it is and what it isn't. British Medical Journal, 150, 1249–5.Google Scholar
  48. SAJPM, Supplement to American Journal of Preventive Medicine. (2000). Introducing the Guide to Community Preventive Services: Methods, first recommendations and expert commentary. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 18, 1.Google Scholar
  49. Straus, R. (1957). The nature and status of medical sociology. American Sociological Review, 22, 200–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Suppe, F. (Ed.). (1977). The structure of scientific theories (2nd ed.). Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  51. Tones, K. (1997). Beyond the randomized controlled trial: A case for A Judicial Review. Health Education Research, 12, 1–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Weiner, J. (1995). The beak of the finch: A story of evolution in our time. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  53. World Health Organization, European Regional Office. (1984). Health promotion: A discussion document on the concepts and principles. Copenhagen: WHO.Google Scholar
  54. World Health Organization, European Regional Office. (1998). Health promotion evaluation: Recommendations to policymakers. World Health Assembly (1998) Resolution WHA 51.12 on Health Promotion. Agenda Item 20, 16 May 1998. Geneva: World Health Organization.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • David V. McQueen

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations