Theoretical models in Community Psychology

The theoretical nature of Community Psychology has raised diverse opinions because there are criteria of seeing it as a predominantly branch However, since sociology and social services are so closely related, the need to develop certain models becomes evident. theoretical.

In this Psychology-Online article, an analysis is made of the theoretical models in community psychology, its validity as a theory, its generalization and other capacities, as well as the contributions they make to the theoretical body of this branch of psychological science.

Index

1. What is community psychology
2. The different theoretical models of Community Psychology
3. Community psychology and social psychology: theoretical models
4. Models of social change
5. Competition models
6. Models of social support
7. Do they function as theoretical models in community psychology?
8. Theories of social psychology: main functions
9. Elements necessary for a theoretical model

We define community psychology as a branch of research whose main objective is to analyze the behavior of people through a collective prism, that is, through the joint analysis of societies and communities.

Having such a broad approach, it is truly difficult to orient oneself in the sea of ​​models, contributions, criteria and theories on the one hand and on the other hand proposals for intervention programs that show the dimensions of the community scientific method and its various applications in the different contexts in which it is difficult to see the correlation with its theoretical framework contextual.

Relationship between community psychology and sociology

As previously mentioned, the objective of the theoretical models in community psychology is to analyze, categorize and study human behavior through group behavior. This objective is shared with the study of sociology. A science that is defined as the historical and phenomenological study of social groups.

The theoretical framework of community psychology remains quite confusing and contradictory. In order to establish this discipline and facilitate the study of communities, a multiplicity of theoretical elaborations have been elaborated, which have been called "Theoretical models", among which we can mention:

• Models of social change
• Supply Models
• Systematic orientation models
• Models of social support
• Objective models
• Ecological models
• Models of action

These theories represent the study from very broad positions (such as those referring to social change, which propose as an object of Community Psychology the macro-social transformation), those that are dedicated to a specific aspect (objective models) and even those that address method and are directed to the intervention community.

In view of the differences presented by these models, Sanchez Vidal (1991) considers that divide into two large groups:

• Analytical models: Which are divided into Global or social and psychosocial
• Operating models

The global or social analytics are those that focus on the global socio-cultural framework of community performance, allowing to relate the psychosocial phenomena of direct interest with Community Psychology, with its determinants and macro correlates social. Psychosocials are registered on the mesosocial level, linking two basic terms; individual and social system at various levels

In the operating models they can be distinguished; the most conceptual and evaluative that defend the objectives or goals of action and the most formal, dynamic and relational, which, focusing on the action and its effects, guide and orient the implementation of community intervention from Psychology.

The development of a theory must start by defining the essential condition of the field of study, for its later projection. In this case, this central criterion is to develop in the individual the ability to be a subject of health, which derives immediately the need to raise the determinants through which this construction can be approached, which are four:

1. Achieve the necessary changes in lives and his or her environment.
2. Make the community have its own meaning and function as a support system.
3. Develop potential in the form of personological resources.
4. Create a space that is a common stage of performance.

In fact, these concepts - indissoluble - are seen in a fractional way in each model and the fourth has not been the object of sufficient attention, which limits the usefulness of the theoretical constructs, because space is the reason for group existence.

In the opinion of the author of the article, models that make the most contributions to the theoretical body of Community Psychology They are:

• Models of social change.
• The competition models.
• Models of social support.

Each of these models study some of the central elements of community theory to achieve the ultimate goal of community action, that is, that people are protagonists of their own Health.

Below is a brief analysis of each theoretical model in community psychology:

In a general sense, promote the transformation of the social environment to readjust its functions and give a space to all its members based on integration. These changes can lead to a usable reorganization in other aspects of human and social activity. The assumption of new roles and improvement of those already assumed are also considered changes. and in general any psychological transformation that allows the search for health, as long as Balance.

In this way, the author believes that those positions that advocate radical social change are not useful. to social, political and economic transformations because it is considered utopian that Psychology can achieve variations of macrosocial magnitude, which is corroborated by the fact that there is no evidence that changes have occurred at that level.

The purposes of radical social change lead to an excessive emphasis on social aspects, which lead to a decrease in psychological evaluation, an oversize of the psychologist role, seeing it as a transformer of social systems, which leads to its theoretical principles having great application difficulties.

They give meaning to the volitional character of the socializing process, where psychological qualities with personological particularity will be developed to demonstrate competent behaviors that allow you to live better, understanding within this and as a priority healthy behaviors. The development of potentialities and the creation of these psychological resources during development ontogenetic allows self-realization, elevation of self-esteem, decision-making and behavior autonomous.

Consider competition in the sense of competent man, of the resilience and the ability to cope with conflicts, as in the absence of them, make these models significant, inasmuch as:

• They emphasize the psychological relevance, considering all the people who are carriers of resources and potentialities. There are no incapable people, we all have potentialities - but different - and some discover them easier than others, because social conditions have been more favorable for it.
• They are framed in the mesosocial level, where the community is located and does not intend to penetrate macrosocial level systems, which makes its constructs more useful.
• They consider as a basic criterion the promotion of healthy behaviors based on scientific knowledge shared by professionals and the community to establish an interactive relationship interested in the growth.
• Referral to the field of health, where you can find knowledge and methodologies to achieve the purposes of empowerment and self-management.

They manifest the meaning of interpersonal relationships in the form of social support, giving importance of the constructive quality of the exchange, which derives that the system has a personal meaning for each individual, allowing to assess the social requirements, whether daily or in crisis, and the feasibility of coping qualitatively useful. Social support promotes health and well-being. It is a mechanism to raise morale and positive affective states, creating an increase in self-esteem, stability and a sense of belonging, which strengthens the individual and the group.

In summary, it can be said that effective social support enables:

• Development of qualities with the consequent psychological strengthening.
• Amplitude in the perspective of physical and psychological balance with the benefits derived from this.
• Decrease in the risk of getting sick (mainly in chronic and non-communicable diseases) Increase in coping ability in the events of life.
• Decrease in dependence on health services.

What matters now is to decide to what extent these definitions are developed theories, that is to say if they really work as "theoretical models". To begin, it is necessary to make some reflections about the theory, its functions, usefulness and the criteria to take into account to evaluate it.

Thus we find that the definition of Kerlinger (1975) on theory gives us essential elements that characterize it, when he says that it is a set of constructs (concepts), definitions and propositions interrelated that represent a systematic point of view of phenomena specifying relationships between variables, in order to explain and predict the phenomena. Other authors such as Black and Champion (1976), Blalock (1984) and Gibbs (1976) also make definitions in this regard very similar to Kerlinger's.

When the literature is reviewed, different ways of explaining and applying the theory are found. The theory is usually identified with a theoretical orientation, theoretical framework, theoretical scheme or model (Sjoberg and Nett, 1980). There are even those who affirm that the theory is a set of unverifiable or incomprehensible ideas that are in the minds of scientists (Black and Champion, 1976), others who see it as something unrelated to reality and even those who believe that theories are the ideas of the authors, equating them in this way with the history of ideas.

The criterion on theory is so broad that we will take Kerlinger's for its seriousness and logic.

Every theory has utility, either because it describes, explains and predicts a phenomenon or fact; why it organizes knowledge or why it guides research. There are no bad or inadequate theories, what happens is that sometimes it is not possible to see the usefulness of the theory because its link with reality is not seen. At other times, what is actually a belief, a set of assumptions, a speculation or an occurrence is called a theory. When the theory is applied to a certain reality and it does not work, this does not make it useless, but inoperative for a specific context.

All theories provide knowledge, although sometimes they see the phenomena that are studied from different angles and some are more developed than others and fulfill their functions better. To decide the value of a theory there are several criteria:

• Its capacity for description, explanation and prediction: Describing implies defining the phenomenon, its characteristics and components, the conditions in which it is presented and the different ways in which it can manifest.

Explain has two meanings: Ferman and Levin, (1979) In the first term it means understanding the causes of the phenomenon and in the second term it refers to the “empirical proof” of the proportions of the theories.

• Logical consistency: The propositions that comprise it must be interrelated with each other, there must be no repetitions, no internal contradictions or incoherence (Black and Champion, 1976).
• Perspective: refers to the level of generality (Ferman and Levin, 1979). A theory has more perspective when the greater quantity of phenomena it explains and the greater number of applications it admits.
• Fructification: The ability of a theory to generate new questions and discoveries.
• Parsimony: It is understood as simplicity, which is a desirable quality, because it does not mean superficiality, but rather that more phenomena can be explained with fewer propositions.

The theorists of Community Psychology have called "theoretical model" to any elaboration, be it descriptive, exploratory or explanatory of the causes that gave rise to this trend, the historical and social conditions of its performance, as well as the methods used, where different different criteria remain on its study

If we take the definition of grand theory and associated theoretical models from Goetz and Lecompte (1988) - who are the authors who refer to this term - the great theory as strongly interrelated systems of propositions and abstract concepts that comprehensively describe, predict, or explain large categories of phenomena. The clearest examples of great theories are those of Newton and Einstein around the relationships between matter, energy and movement.

These authors consider that in the field of social sciences it is difficult to reach this theoretical level, which is attributed by some to the lack of maturity of these sciences or to the complexity of human behavior so that it is reducible to laws universal. Despite this criterion, we believe that if it is possible to see great theories in Psychology, such as that of historical-cultural development of the psychic processes of man by Vygotsky (1987)

Goetz and Lecompte also believe that the grand theory is associated with theoretical models, understood as “ set of assumptions, concepts and propositions loosely interrelated that configure a vision of the world.

It is clearly understandable that for the formulation of a theoretical model are necessary:

• The existence of a grand theory which to take as a theoretical framework.
• A level of generalization that allows its verification and use in various contexts.
• That is constituted in methodological orientation and research source in that field of study.

These authors go on to say that adenines of the grand theory and their associated theoretical models, there are also formal theories or of intermediate range “which are sets of interrelated propositions, whose object is to explain an abstract class of behaviors humans". And finally they refer to substantive theories "which are interrelated propositions or concepts which focus on certain aspects of populations, settings or times."

The conclusion can be derived that it is not only the field or object of study that defines the level and complexity of the theory, but also the depth of study and results obtained those that allow locating the theory at one level or another.

In our opinion, calling all these studies "theoretical models", sometimes general and other times very particular, is oversize them, because they do not have the generalizing capacity that is expected from a theoretical model, but must be located within the substantive theories. This analysis is based on:

• They operate at the level of groups and human behaviors.
• Its capacity for generalization, coherence and prediction is limited to certain contexts.
• The absence of a great theory that would guide and orient them so that they had an interrelation directed towards the same objective.
• It is not possible to form a vision of the world, not because the community field does not allow it, but because of its limited development and fragmentation.

These theories are useful, but the absence of a sense of unity is evident, which prevents the configuration of a theoretical body that involves theory and praxis in close relationship and interdependence.

In the necessary link of the principles of: change, social support, development of resources and scenarios, the latter is urgent and that the investigations are directed in this sense.

This article is merely informative, in Psychology-Online we do not have the power to make a diagnosis or recommend a treatment. We invite you to go to a psychologist to treat your particular case.

If you want to read more articles similar to Theoretical models in Community Psychology, we recommend that you enter our category of Social psychology.

• Vigotski, S. L. (1987) History of the development of higher psychic functions. Edit. Technical Scientist, Havana.
• Kelinger, J. (1975) Behavioral Research. Techniques and methodology. Mexico. New Interamerican Publishing House.
• Sánchez Vidal (1991) Community Psychology. Conceptual and operational bases: Intervention methods 2nd edition PPU Barcelona
• Black, J and Champion, D. (1976) Methosds and issues in social research; New York: John Wiley and sons
• Blalock, H. M. (1984) Construction of theories in Social Sciences: from verbal formulations to mathematics Edit. Threshing
• Ferman, G. S. and Levin, J. (1979) Research in Social Sciences, Mexico Edit. LIMUSA
• Gibbs, J. (1976) Sociological theory construction. Hinsdale III Dryden Press
• Sjoberg, G. and Nett, R. (1980) Methodology of social research Edit Trillas